News & Updates

The Nebraska State Bar Association’s 2012 Judicial Performance Evaluation results have been released, showing positive ratings for judges across the state, and the Bar has developed a radio spot to draw attention to this resource for voters. Nebraska uses the “Missouri Plan” for selecting judges and after appointment judges serve an initial term of three years before standing for a retention vote.

All eight candidates for the state’s appellate courts qualified for public financing, with supreme court candidates receiving $240,100 each and court of appeals candidates receiving $164,400. At least two outside groups are raising and spending funds in support of the Republican supreme court candidate.

The house of representatives voted to abolish the Kansas Commission on Judicial Performance and end the state’s judicial performance evaluation program. While House Democrats believe the program provides important information to voters about judges, Republicans questioned its impartiality since all evaluated judges have been recommended for retention.

In 2012, superior court judges in Pinal County will stand for retention rather than reelection. Because the county’s population now exceeds 250,000, its judges will now be included in the state’s merit selection, retention election, and performance evaluation program. Pinal County joins Maricopa County and Pima County.

This article from the Colorado Lawyer discusses the 2011 conference on evaluating appellate judges and its outcomes. In 2010, a number of states saw organized opposition to the retention of Supreme Court justices. This opposition was motivated…

Two new laws will require more online information about judges standing for retention in 2012. Under this legislation, the commission on judicial performance review will post a listing of cases in which judges ruled on the constitutionality of statutes, a short biography of each judge, and the full text of their decisions during the current term.

A subcommittee of the judicial branch in Connecticut is reviewing whether the state's evaluation system, which includes surveys to jurors and attorneys, is achieving its goal. The subcommittee is considering ways to revise the existing questionnaire.

Missouri Bar President John S. Johnston countered a recent Wall Street Journal editorial attack on its merit-based judicial selection system: "Although I usually find your opinion pieces very good, I read with sadness your editorial 'Missouri Compromised.' Your editorial position on the issue of merit selection of judges, often called The Missouri Plan, is simply wrong."