News & Updates

This week, Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper signed legislation to reauthorize and restructure the state’s judicial performance evaluation (JPE) program. Colorado was one of the first states in the nation to establish a JPE program to help judges improve their own performance on the bench and inform voters about that performance for judicial retention elections. The 1988 legislation that created Colorado’s program included a provision scheduling the program for repeal in 30 years—on June 30, 2019. Earlier this year, both the General Assembly and the Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation tackled head-on the challenge of drafting new legislation to keep the program in place, and IAALS applauds their efforts.

Our O’Connor Advisory Committee (OAC) members are sounding the alarm about a growing and concerning pattern: state lawmakers all but declaring war on our courts. In defense of America’s system of checks and balances, the OAC banded together on an op-ed that ran in the Arizona Republic last week. In “If you like checks and balances, these bills to usurp the courts should worry you,” the OAC explains how legislation in Arizona is an example of the 41 bills introduced in 15 states this year that would “control the ways by which judges reach the bench, unseat judges currently on courts, and generally restrict courts’ jurisdiction and power,” should they become law. They argue that these state bills interfere with the independence of the judiciary and threaten our democracy.

This month, the Virginia Supreme Court begin pilot testing a performance evaluation program for its appellate judges. Among the sources of guidance to which the court looked in developing the pilot program was IAALS’ Recommended Tools for Evaluating Appellate Judges. With the implementation of this program, Virginia joins ten other states that seek input on appellate judges’ job performance from attorneys and other judges. This feedback is used by appellate judges for self-improvement, and it is also shared with the public to ensure trust and confidence in the judiciary.

The Rule of Law is absolutely under attack in the United States of America—from elected officials, state legislative bodies, and groups of individuals. The attacks are apparent in politicians’ tirades, legislative proposals that would limit the authority of courts, and assaults on established principles of law such as federal versus state authority. But, the solution is not to put sandbags along the perimeters and bemoan the idiocy of some people.

Now that a simple majority of votes suffice to confirm a Supreme Court Justice, each party will invariably put forward the most ideologically-extreme candidates that they can. No more moderates, no more coalition-builders, no more impartial judges. Rather, the Court could be populated, over time, by judges who have partisan instincts or agendas—maybe even by judges who have a particular alignment with the president who nominates them.

I am so proud to present to you our 2016 Annual Report, capturing a remarkable year in our existence and representing the work of our truly visionary staff. Last year we celebrated our tenth-year anniversary. As we embark upon the next ten, in this report we embrace the theme: The Stage is Set: Lights, Camera, Innovation. Throughout the report, you will find not only evidence of what we have accomplished, but also the ways in which we are setting the stage for continuing and fundamental change. You will also find quotes from Nobel Prize-winning bards, Tony Award-winning lyricists, and favorite authors—that inspire the creative in each of us. 

Judge Neil Gorsuch’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this week underscored the difference between elected officials and judges. He repeatedly declined to answer questions about his personal views, declined to express his opinion of various precedents, and repeatedly swore to uphold the law, irrespective of the parties before him.

As reported by the Washington Post, the President is not the only one who has taken on the courts recently: it is also happening in state legislatures around the country. This comes as no surprise to state court watchers; in fact, legislation targeting state courts for unpopular decisions is now commonplace. (Our March 2016, January 2015, and February 2014 blog posts chronicle these efforts.)

New Mexico Supreme Court Chief Justice Charles Daniels had grim news for state legislators at his annual State of the Judiciary speech last month: the state’s judicial system may no longer be able to provide New Mexicans with adequate access to their Constitutional rights due to a crippling financial crisis.

IAALS Executive Director Rebecca Love Korulis wrote in this week's Denver Post, “But in the legal system as in football, the judges on the bench and the referees on the field are charged with enforcing the rules – sometimes in close calls. While we may not like a ruling, we respect and accept the authority of those entrusted with making it.”

Robust evaluation of judges has a dual purpose. It educates judges on their strengths and weaknesses on the bench and equips them to make necessary improvements. It also empowers voters, legislators, and governors with meaningful information they can use when deciding whether to retain or reappoint judges. Across the country, people are struggling with how to gauge whether a judge is doing a good job.

Based on its decade of work in the field of judicial performance evaluation (JPE), IAALS was invited to contribute a chapter on this topic to the recently published 8th edition of the American Bar Association’s The Improvement of the Administration of Justice.

At a point when public mistrust of the government seems to be at an all-time high, a recent survey conducted by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) shows that public opinion of at least one branch of government is trending in the right…

On November 3-4, 2016, IAALS convened a blue ribbon group of judges, scholars, and attorneys from across the country to discuss best practices for procedural rules for judicial recusal. The group discussed the need for procedures that are fair to both judges and litigants, that provide transparency without sacrificing efficiency, and that uphold the public’s confidence in the fairness and impartiality of the judiciary.

Here's an overview of 2016 election outcomes that impacted state courts and judges. Ballot Measures Georgia voters approved Amendment 3, which abolishes the Judicial Qualifications Commission (the disciplinary entity for the state’s judges) and…

Since Colorado is IAALS’ home base, we are thrilled to join in the celebration of the state’s 50th anniversary of the adoption of merit selection for judges. Colorado was at the forefront of a national merit selection movement that took place in the mid- and late-twentieth century.

Implicit bias can obstruct the goal of fair, trusted, and accountable courts, and many groups have recognized how such unconscious perceptions can affect litigants, judges, and other aspects of the legal system. Recently, the American Bar Association (ABA) House of Delegates took action by adopting Resolution 116, which amended the ABA Principles for Juries and Jury Trials.

With our publication Judges Aren’t Sexy: Engaging and Educating Voters in a Crowded World, we offered a range of practical recommendations—including communications strategies and assets for social media and a messaging platform—for communicating with judicial voters. A handful of states have put our recommendations into practice for this election cycle.

On September 17, 1787, the Framers signed the United States Constitution. The day is observed by some lawyer and judge groups but, unfortunately, largely goes unnoticed by the rest of the population. Our Constitution is masterful, and deserves to be celebrated by all of us.

The United States Constitution will be 229 years old on September 17. The Constitution was the document that charted the course for our country, mirrored in significant part in state constitutions that followed. In one respect, the Constitution is like the rebar embedded in the concrete that supports our houses, buildings, skyscrapers, and bridges. It is unseen, but critical to the strength of the structure. So, too, our Constitution is fused into the heartbeat of our economy, our democracy, and our court system. Without it, we could not do business, pass laws, create rules of interaction with one another, or transfer power peacefully.