The U.S. Supreme Court recently adopted a code of ethics to enhance transparency and trust. However, critics note its reliance on self-enforcement, vagueness, and similarity to existing practices, raising concerns about its impact on justices' behavior and public confidence.
To say that Sandra Day O’Connor fundamentally changed the legal landscape for good is really only a beginning, not a summation, of the contributions she made. To my mind, her deepest value came in the simple doing of things and doing them in an authentic and straightforward way that forged a new path forward.
We at IAALS are among the many saddened by the passing of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. We are honored that Justice O’Connor chose to partner with us to continue her work on judicial selection through IAALS, and we strive to carry on her legacy.
IAALS and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor (Ret.) have identified a model for choosing, evaluating, and retaining judges that balances the need for fair and impartial courts with the need for public accountability and transparency.
The election—and subsequent threats of impeachment—of Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Janet Protasiewicz has raised concerns about the politicization of the judiciary. These developments underscore the need for merit-based judicial selection to ensure impartiality and public trust in the judicial system.
This November, thousands of judges across 38 states find themselves on the ballot, and there is reason to believe that this year judicial races will capture more voter attention than usual.
In a recent national survey asking about the importance of 12 characteristics of judges, survey respondents indicated that the public prizes a judge's professional qualities above all others, including political qualities—preferences that have obvious relevance for methods of judicial selection.
Following a new law giving the state's governor the sole power to fill mid-term judicial vacancies, former Montana Supreme Court Justice James C. Nelson calls for the implementation of a merit-based judicial selection process to keep Montana’s courts free from partisanship and outside influence.
In December 2020, the Texas Commission on Judicial Selection submitted its report on the fairness, effectiveness, and desirability of partisan elections for judicial selection in Texas. Although the commission recommended against the current partisan elections method, the members did not agree on an alternative method for judicial selection and will continue studying potential reforms.
In advance of the 2020 election, Our Courts Colorado has released a series of PSAs featuring diverse and well-known members of the community who explain why voters should take the time to educate themselves about the judges up for retention and then cast their votes accordingly.
