Selection Snapshots

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 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.

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.

As has become standard operating procedure in the last several sessions, the Kansas legislature is once again considering proposals to alter the process for selecting the state's appellate judges. Chief Justice Lawton Nuss has spoken out against efforts to end Kansas' merit selection process for appellate judges and has found an ally in O'Connor Advisory Committee member and former Chief Justice of Texas Wallace Jefferson.

Pennsylvania is one of two states that is electing supreme court justices in 2015. To provide the public with information about judges on the ballot, the Pennsylvania Bar Association offers ratings of appellate judicial candidates provided by the Bar's Judicial Evaluation Commission (JEC). But, a sitting commonwealth court judge and supreme court candidate has called that evaluation process into question.

In the upcoming legislative session in a handful of states, lawmakers are expected to propose legislation aimed at courts and judges. Some Washington legislators have filed a bill that would make the state's judicial elections partisan. Two bills that Wisconsin lawmakers plan to file in 2015 would impact the Chief Justice. And, the Kansas legislature will likely take up a proposed constitutional amendment to change the way supreme court justices are chosen.

Delaware Law Weekly recently published an article discussing how judicial vacancies are filled in Delaware. Specifically, the article focused on the state’s Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC) and whether it is appropriate for members of the JNC to resign and then apply for judicial positions. IAALS's own Malia Reddick spoke to the problems created by a process where this is allowed.