News & Updates

In a recent opinion piece, Judge Daniel E. Ramczyk emphasizes the importance and benefits of New Mexico’s judicial selection and retention process, and in particular the role that the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission (JPEC) plays in providing valuable feedback to judges as well as to the citizens who vote for them.

This year marks the 10th anniversary of IAALS’ work to continuously improve America’s legal system and reestablish it as the aspirational model for justice globally. To mark this milestone, IAALS celebrates both its accomplishments and its bright future, all while tackling the most critical issues of the day. Having a trusted and trustworthy legal system is essential to our democracy, our economy, and our freedom. IAALS staff, founders, partners, sponsors, and advisors all recognize that to earn that trust, the legal system must be just, impartial, and responsive.

On the occasion of IAALS’ 10th anniversary, I’ve been reflecting on the strength of our partnership over the years, and on the value of that partnership as our shared work for fair, high quality courts takes on ever-greater significance. Justice at Stake is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization working to keep America's courts fair and impartial. We work for reforms to keep politics and special interests out of the courtroom—so judges can protect our Constitution, our rights, and the rule of law. As you can see, our mission aligns pretty perfectly with that of IAALS and its Quality Judges Initiative.

In April, there will be a vacancy on the U.S. District Court for Colorado due to the impending retirement of Judge Robert Blackburn. As with all Article III judgeships, the President will nominate someone to fill the seat, and that person must then be confirmed by a majority of the Senate—no small task in the final year of President Obama’s second term and with divided government.

The North Carolina Bar Association is exploring how tweaks in its judicial evaluation process can have real impact on results. As recommended by both the NCSC and IAALS, the latest performance evaluation surveys included a structured free recall exercise that urged attorneys to think of specific experiences with the judges they are about to rate, rather than general impressions, along with both positive and negative aspects of those experiences.

Citing concerns about the erosion of “citizens’ and businesses’ confidence in the integrity of their judges,” a new report from the Committee for Economic Development calls for states to replace judicial elections with elements of the O’Connor Judicial Selection Plan.

When spending in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court election surged to more than $16.5 million this month, it set a new record in U.S. history. Although, while it was record-breaking, this election was no aberration. Its sky-high spending, ad war among special interests, and dominance by candidates who spent the most all fit into a pattern.

The Supreme Court of India recently struck down a new law that sought to increase the executive branch’s power over the selection of judges. The Court ruled the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act unconstitutional, commenting that “once the constitutional structure is shaken, democracy collapses.”

November 2015 is the 75th anniversary of the Missouri Plan, an innovative approach to selecting state judges intended to preserve their impartiality while holding them publicly accountable for their performance on the bench. First adopted by Missouri voters in 1940, this process is now used to select at least some judges in two-thirds of the states.

Colorado Senator Michael Bennet has announced the formation of a bipartisan screening committee to consider potential nominees for an upcoming vacancy on the state’s federal trial court. We at IAALS are pleased that, as Senator Bennet states in his…

In response to record-breaking judicial election spending, and an unprecedented series of scandals involving supreme court justices, reform-minded folks in Pennsylvania are making historic strides toward change.

For the last ten years, IAALS—the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System—has worked to rebuild the civil justice system. After much work, and through collaboration with some of the very best minds in the country, we are finally reaching a critical goalpost in that mission.

According to a new study by Reuters, in states where supreme court justices are elected and reelected by the voters, justices uphold death sentences more often than their counterparts in states where justices stand for retention or reappointment…

Do you trust the judiciary? If you thought “yes,” then you may be in a shrinking crowd. Judge Kevin S. Burke, Hennepin County district judge and IAALS board member, begins a recent article with candor – Public trust in the courts has dropped to an…

With the leadership of Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, a coalition of groups in Ohio has launched a new website—Judicial Votes Count—to better educate voters in judicial elections. The site offers information about the structure of the Ohio court system and the role of judges in that system, as well as details about how to vote in Ohio.

When the Senate went into recess in August it was on pace to set a new record for fewest judicial confirmations within the final two years of a presidential term, a level not seen since the Eisenhower administration. Russell Wheeler, IAALS Board…

he Quality Judges Initiative at IAALS, along with Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and other members of our advisory committee, has been reaching out to governors of these states to urge them to use nominating commissions when filling court openings that occur between scheduled elections. These vacancy nominating commissions invite applications for open positions, screen and interview the candidates who apply, and recommend a short list of the best qualified to the governor for appointment.

States across the country are wrestling with the question of whether a mandatory retirement age should be imposed upon judges, and if so, what that age should be. A number of states are considering raising or eliminating their age limits, while in at least one state, lowering the maximum age has been proposed by legislators to try and keep the courts in line.

In response to the end-of-term decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court on marriage equality and the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), some presidential candidates are calling for changes to the life tenure that justices enjoy under Article III of the U.S. Constitution.

In the last few weeks, legislators in two states have passed laws aimed at influencing upcoming supreme court decisions. In Kansas, trouble has brewed between the judiciary and the other two branches, stemming largely from state court decisions ordering the legislature to spend more on public education. Meanwhile, the Republican majority in the North Carolina legislature has instituted retention elections, in place of contested elections, for supreme court justices seeking additional terms.