News & Updates

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.

With three of the seven seats on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court up for election in November, the stakes were high in the May 19 primaries. The twelve candidates raised more than $5 million and spent approximately half of that on TV ads. The ads tended to focus on the need to restore the high court’s integrity, in light of the fact that two of the vacancies were created by resignations in the face of scandal.

On April 29, 2015, the United States Supreme Court adopted amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and submitted them to Congress. The long-awaited amendments, often described as a “package” of complementary amendments, focus on increasing cooperation, achieving proportionality in discovery, and encouraging early case management by judges.

In a ruling that took some fair courts advocates by surprise, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the authority of states to bar judges and judicial candidates from personally soliciting campaign contributions. Chief Justice Roberts delivered the majority opinion in Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar, holding that “[a] State’s decision to elect judges does not compel it to compromise public confidence in their integrity.”

In April, over half of Wisconsin voters approved a proposed constitutional amendment that will allow the members of the state supreme court to select its chief justice, rather than the chief justice being determined by seniority.

The West Virginia legislature has passed, and the governor has signed, a bill that makes elections for the state's judges nonpartisan. Despite the new legislation, it is not possible to remove all traces of partisanship from judicial races. An additional consequence of the new law is that it effectively ends straight-ticket voting for judges.

In a recent Politico piece, the former chief justice of Alabama's supreme court offered a firsthand perspective on the relationship between electing judges and maintaining impartial courts and judges, and other judges have shared similar sentiments. In 2012, Chief Justice Cobb participated in an IAALS roundtable, which reached consensus on several "cornerstones" for contested judicial elections.