News & Updates

People for the American Way lauded the work of a federal judicial screening committee established by Senators Udall and Bennet to assist them in recommending to the White House a replacement for a retiring U.S. District Court judge. Upon learning of Chief Judge Wiley Daniel’s plans to take senior status, the senators reactivated the 11-member bipartisan panel they have used for two previous vacancies.

Proponents of replacing Minnesota’s nonpartisan judicial elections with commission-based gubernatorial appointment, retention elections, and performance evaluation were pleased to see Democrats regain a majority in the legislature for 2013, believing that the reform movement lost momentum when Republicans took over in 2010.

In an interview with Parade Magazine, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, Honorary Chair of the Advisory Committee to the Quality Judges Initiative, discusses why approval ratings for the U.S. Supreme Court justices have fallen, stressing that the public's broken confidence in the courts is due to misconceptions that the Court should base their decisions on political and personal beliefs rather than on the law.

The defeat of two incumbent supreme court justices has led some to consider making changes to the judicial election process. Neither justices’ qualifications were called into question, and both received higher ratings from the state bar association than did their challengers—one of whom was “not recommended.”

Senate Republicans are split on whether to consider confirmation of judicial nominees, many of which have been pending for several months, during the lame-duck session or wait until the next Congress.

In Bexar County, the recent election has produced another wave of straight-ticket voting on judges. Texas is one of only three states in which voters can cast a straight-party ballot for all candidates, including judicial candidates. This year, Democrats won all but one of the races, but in 2010, a similar partisan sweep resulted in Republicans winning every contested judicial race in Bexar County.

Following the defeat of a proposed constitutional amendment that would have given the governor greater authority in appointing nominating commission members and more discretion in selecting judges, supporters of the measure vowed to "regroup and move forward with something more aggressive" for 2014.

Two supreme court candidates who face a December runoff have taken different tacks in their campaigns. While one candidate has discussed his position as "pro-life, pro-gun and pro-traditional marriage" and a supporter of the death penalty, the other has not publicly shared his views because he does not want to risk having to recuse himself from hearing cases involving controversial issues in the future.

This special edition of Selection Snapshots provides an overview of the challenges to judicial retention, court-related ballot measures, supreme court elections, public financing of judicial campaigns, and judicial campaign oversight committees.

On Bill Moyer's show, Sally Pederson and Joy Corning, co-founders of a bipartisan coalition called Justice Not Politics, discuss the risks to the judicial system when "justices are at the mercy of partisan passions and money in politics." Justice Not Politics successfully campaigned against conservative groups in Iowa that were working to oust a justice involved in a 2009 unanimous decision recognizing a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.

LawWeek Colorado recently interviewed Executive Director Rebecca Love Kourlis about IAALS' efforts to build public confidence and trust for judges and the court system. Referencing a recent publication of the Quality Judges Initiative, "Cornerstones of State Judicial Selection," Kourlis asserts that constituents expect judges to be honest, fair, and faithful to the rule of law and for courts to be impartial, accountable, and transparent. To achieve these principles, Kourlis says that citizens need to think critically about whether the current judicial retention system is delivering what they want out of judges and the courts.

While the last decade has seen a sort of "nationalization" of state high court races, coverage of election night results remains below that of congressional races. In 2010, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) attempted, thanks to advancements in reporting from the various secretaries of state as well as social media, to offer up election night coverage via Twitter (@StateCourts) and with a website dedicated to compiling the results. Coverage will be back again in 2012.

Addressing efforts to oust Justice David Wiggins from his seat on Iowa's high court because of an unpopular decision, the O’Connor Advisory Committee Chair, Justice Ruth V. McGregor, has written an op-ed about how special interest groups are "asking Iowa’s voters to disregard the fundamental principles of a state justice system that has served Iowa well."

An ad sponsored by the Washington, D.C.-based Judicial Crisis Network criticizes a supreme court candidate for volunteering to provide free legal representation to individuals suspected of terrorism. Spending on the ad is expected to top $1 million.

The ACLU of Indiana filed a constitutional challenge to the process for electing superior court judges in Marion County. Under a system that may be unique, voters in each of the major party primaries cast ballots for half of the judicial seats to be filled. This ensures partisan balance on the bench, but it also makes the general election a mere formality.

Four justices who served with former chief justice Roy Moore are among 10 current and former justices of both parties who have endorsed his opponent in Moore’s bid to be chief justice again. He was removed from the court in 2003 for ignoring a federal court order to remove a Ten Commandments display from the state judicial building.

Data collected by the judicial selection commission indicates that interest in applying for a state court judgeship has declined over the years. The most striking example of this is that, while 24 attorneys applied for a supreme court vacancy in 2003, only seven did so in 2011 and only nine applied in 2012.

In 2004, challenger Will T. Scott defeated incumbent justice Janet Stumbo. In 2012, Stumbo is challenging Justice Scott to regain the seat. The judicial campaign conduct committee has labeled ads by both candidates misleading, with at least one ad appearing to be designed to appeal to racial prejudice.

Responding to the Oklahoma Civil Justice Council’s rating of justices standing for retention based on their decisions in civil liability cases, a group known as “Yes for Fair and Impartial Judges” mounted an educational campaign to encourage voters to consider the justices’ integrity, fairness, and impartiality.

What began two years ago, with a group's successful ousting of three Iowa Supreme Court Justices who ruled in favor of allowing same-sex marriage, has escalated into a movement to rid state courts of justices who have made undesirable rulings. Instead of pushing to remove justices for misconduct or incompetence, groups are doing so because of disagreements over particular decisions.