Kavanaugh's Effect on Supreme Court in Historical Perspective

The U.S. Supreme Court is by far the most important court in the country, so it's the site of the most important judicial selection in the country. This importance is heightened further with selection of a replacement for a "swing vote" like Justice Kennedy, whose seat may soon be filled Brett Kavanaugh. This conservative move is placed in historical context by Emily Bazelon in today's NY Times.

NY Times Depicts Kansas Battle as Judicial Independence vs. Politicized Courts

Predictably-progressive oversimplifications by the Times include "In the Kansas system, judges are appointed by the governor," The Times fails to mention the bar's extraordinarily large role in selecting Kansas Supreme Court justices and the politicization that produces.

NY Times Connects Kansas School Funding with Kansas Judicial Selection

Unfortunately, the Times ("Under the current system, the governor chooses from three nominees put forth by a nine-member committee that includes lawyers and appointees of the governor") does not say who selects those lawyers, which is the problem with the current Kansas Supreme Court selection process.

NY Times Covers Outside Campaign Spending in Judicial Races

The paper of record shows a photo of a North Carolina Supreme Court justice carrying campaign signs across the street.  For many of us that's an settling image, which is probably what the NY Times intended, as it's no fan of judicial elections.  For others, I suppose it's a positive image of the powerful being subject to democratic accountability.

The NY Times writes
"Judges on higher courts are elected rather than appointed in 22 states, and in 16 more they must face retention elections at some point after their selection, according to Justice at Stake, an advocacy group in Washington. Corporations and political parties — and trial lawyers and unions — seek ideologically compatible state judges, legal experts say, because their rulings can affect redistricting and laws on such key issues as liability, medical malpractice and workers’ compensation."

More on the NC races' campaign funding here

More on the NC races here

Diversity Push by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Alliance for Justice and NY Times

Progressive group Alliance for Justice, Sen. Elizabeth Warren and the New York Times seem to be coordinating a push for diversity on the federal bench--meaning "judicial nominees with diverse professional backgrounds – including those who have worked as lawyers for public interest groups, litigated civil rights cases and served as public defenders."  First Alliance for Justice issued a report.  Then the NY Times praised it.  Then Alliance for Justice hosted an event with Elizabeth Warren and cited  the NY Times coverage of its earlier report.

Video here

More video of E. Warren here