News & Updates

The State Bar of Michigan, which represents more than 43,000 attorneys and judges, has asked the secretary of state to require disclosure of funders of "issue ads" in state elections. Specifically, the bar is seeking an interpretive ruling that such ads should be treated as advocacy rather than electioneering and thus as official campaign spending. Such a ruling would require the disclosure of donors who are currently anonymous.

In a 5-0 ruling, the Arizona Supreme Court struck down a law that required the state’s judicial nominating commission to send the names of five candidates to the governor for possible appointment. According to the court’s opinion, “the Legislature has no authority to statutorily mandate procedures inconsistent with Arizona's Constitution,” which allows commissions to give the governor as few as three names.

According to a poll funded by the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, 74 percent of Oklahoma voters favor choosing appellate judges in contested elections over a merit selection and retention process, and 69 percent support amending the constitution to make this change. Seventy-six percent of respondents want term limits for appellate judges.

Last week, Governor Brownback nominated his chief counsel, Caleb Stegall, to a newly created seat on Kansas' court of appeals, reigniting a war of words between his supporters and detractors. Now, in response to the charge that Brownback pushed for a change in the selection process in order to appoint Stegall to the bench, a member of the judicial nominating commission is speaking out.

A recent piece in the Chicago Sun-Times sheds light on the process for selecting judges in Cook County, Illinois. Earlier this month, the Cook County Democratic Party's Judicial Selection Committee met to "slate" candidates, a process through which candidates meet with the committee to discuss their qualifications in hopes of getting the party's endorsement. Some participants in the slating process assert that most of the party's picks are pre-determined based on political connections instead of qualifications.

For the second time in his tenure—and the second time in state history—New Jersey Governor Chris Christie declined to renominate a sitting supreme court justice. Christie offered two rationales for the decision to pass over Justice Helen Hoens in favor of superior court judge Faustino Fernandez-Vina: his interest in sparing Justice Hoens the senate's likely "political vengeance" in the confirmation process and the need for more diversity on the high court.

The North Carolina legislature sent to Governor McCrory for approval a bill that would revamp the state's elections, including eliminating public financing for appellate judicial elections. Created in 2002 by the Judicial Campaign Reform Act, the so-called "Voter-Owned Elections" program allowed candidates with qualifying contributions to receive a public grant to finance their campaigns and eliminated the need to seek campaign support from attorneys and others who may later appear before them in court.

Recently, speculation has surfaced about whether judicial selection and tenure will be addressed at a special legislative session in Oklahoma, called by Governor Fallin. Although a Republican legislator wrote a letter warning judges around the state of rumors that there would be efforts to impose term limits and to eliminate the judicial nominating commission, a spokesman for the governor offered assurances that the only topic for the special session is lawsuit reform.

Richard Gabriel recently penned an article for CNN following the conclusion of the George Zimmerman trial, in which he referenced several reports that examine potential biases in the justice system. Among them was IAALS’ Leveling the Playing Field: Gender, Ethnicity, and Judicial Performance Evaluation, which explores whether there is evidence that implicit biases enter into evaluations of judges’ performances.

In Minnesota, a broad-based group known as the Coalition for Impartial Justice, which includes more than 30 business, labor, religious, citizen, and legal groups, is working to implement the 2007 recommendations of the Quie Commission. The commission was unanimous in calling for the adoption of a "merit selection" process for judges and a performance evaluation program, with a majority of the commission favoring retention elections for subsequent terms.

In April, the Arizona legislature passed and the governor signed a bill directing the state's judicial nominating commissions to submit the names of at least five finalists for each judicial vacancy. Last week, four members of the appellate judicial nominating commission filed a petition with the state supreme court to declare the new law unconstitutional. The law is in apparent conflict with a constitutional provision calling for the commission to submit at least three names.

Last week, controversy arose in Kansas over Governor Brownback's announcement that he would not release the names of applicants for a court of appeals vacancy. The governor initially rejected a petition requesting that applicants' names be released, but he may be reconsidering that decision. Meanwhile, screening committees in Wisconsin and Florida, established to assist them in recommending potential federal judges to the White House, have differing plans on the confidentiality of applicant names.

Back in March, the Kansas legislature adopted a new process for choosing intermediate appellate court judges in the 2013 session. The governor will make judicial appointments with full discretion, which must then be confirmed by the senate. This process will kick into gear on July 1, but Governor Brownback has announced a new wrinkle: the names of applicants for the judicial position will not be made public.

A new poll by the Center for American Progress assesses voter support for judicial selection changes that are currently under consideration around the country. The highest level of support—80 percent—was found for stronger disclosure laws for judicial campaigns. And, though Republican legislators in North Carolina want to move from nonpartisan to partisan judicial elections, 68 percent of voters nationwide prefer nonpartisan races.

Quality Judges has just released A Credit to the Courts: The Selection, Appointment, and Reappointment Process for Bankruptcy Judges. This study provides the first in-depth examination of the process for selecting U.S. bankruptcy judges, highlighting the similarities and differences among the regional circuits. Despite the number of cases processed in these high-volume courts, and their significance in the financial lives of individuals and businesses alike, very little was known about how the judges who preside over these courts come to be on the bench, until now.

Judge Kevin Burke, a Minnesota trial judge and member of the IAALS Board of Advisors, seconded Ohio Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor's call for selection reform in her state. According to Judge Burke, selection reform in Ohio is needed for three reasons: judicial elections may negatively impact public perceptions of judges and courts, not enough voters participate in judicial elections, and more can be done to educate judicial voters.

Governor Tom Corbett nominated superior court judge Correale F. Stevens to fill the supreme court vacancy created by former justice Joan Orie Melvin's resignation following her criminal conviction. At the same time, a sitting supreme court justice is now the subject of an FBI investigation. The investigation is focusing on whether Justice Seamus McCaffery and his wife, who serves as his chief aide, violated the state Ethics Act when she received fees for referring clients to personal-injury law firms.

The Tennessee legislature opted not to renew the state’s judicial nominating commission, and it is set to expire on June 30. Three appellate judges announced last week that they will not stand for retention in August 2014, with the expectation that the commission could screen applicants and nominate candidates to fill their vacancies before it ceases to exist in a few weeks. At least one legislator is concerned about setting the judicial selection process in motion more than a year before the vacancies occur.

It has been an eventful week judicial selection-wise in the Kansas legislature. On Monday, the chairman of the senate judiciary committee announced the details of a compromise selection reform proposal for the state’s appellate judges, which the Kansas Bar Association's board of governors rejected on Tuesday. And on Wednesday, the house judiciary committee chair introduced three new proposals aimed at the appellate court.

As a former Chief Justice of the New Hampshire Supreme Court and a current member of the IAALS Board of Advisors, I commend Governor Maggie Hassan for her wisdom in establishing the Judicial Selection Commission to advise her in filling vacancies on our state’s courts. Such a commission ensures that political considerations take a back seat to qualifications, experience, and judicial potential in selecting judges.