Selection of Kansas District Court Chief Judge

The Topeka Capital Journal reports on two bills in the Senate Judiciary Committee.  One would end the Supreme Court's authority to choose who the chief judge is in each of the state's 31 judicial districts, in favor of allowing the state's trial judges to vote.  "A separate bill also would strip the Supreme Court of its administrative authority over the entire judicial branch's budget in favor of allowing 31 separate judicial budgets that would be administered by each district."

One of the more interesting comments, by someone called "doubltap", says "This is just payback for the [Supreme Court of Kansas]  not minding it's own damned business on school funding. If the liberal demo appointments had kept their noses out of the K-12 funding issues, they would not be getting their butts kicked by the legislature today. But, of course, the whole purpose of [Gov. Sebelius] appointing her cronies to the courts was to facilitate quid pro quo for the KNEA, who contributed to heavily to her campaign. Hopefully, Kansans will get to vote on a constitutional amendment this November which will eradicate the qualitative language that currently give this bunch of judicial activists a hook to hang their hats on, and we can get back to the legislature, not the court's liberal stooges, determining proper funding for our schools."

Effects of Ending the Filibuster for Federal Judicial Nominees

In November, US Senate Democrats triggered the nuclear option of doing away with the filibuster for all judicial nominees except the Supreme Court. "But so far, removing that procedural hurdle hasn't changed much in the Senate, where there hasn't been a single vote on a district court nominee since December." the Huffington Post reports.

Tennessee Judicial Selection Controversy

Current Tennessee system of judicial appointments, evaluations and retention elections for appellate courts is unconstitutional, according to this op-ed in the Tennessean. Law review articles on point by Vanderbilt Law Prof Brian Fitzpatrick here and here

New Mexico Judges Switch From Republican to Democrat

Interesting politics, involving Republican Governor and VP mentionee Susana Martinez, reported by Las Cruces Sun-News

Iowa Supreme Court Selection Continues to be Contested

Among Governor Branstad’s recent appointees to the state Judicial Nominating Commission is former Rep. Betty De Boef, who was one of five legislators to file articles of impeachment against four of the justices involved in the same-sex marriage case, Varnum v. Brein.  Until 2010, a sitting judge had never lost a retention election. However, during the November 2, 2010 election, three sitting Supreme Court justices: Marsha Ternus, David Baker and Michael Streit, were voted out of office in reaction to Varnum.

My discussion of Iowa Supreme Court selection is here with Radio Iowa News Director O. Kay Henderson, Rep. Chris Hagenow, Rep. Kurt Swaim, Iowa Judicial Nominating Commissioner Guy R. Cook, and others discuss Iowa Supreme Court selection, Feb. 22, 2011, at an event hosted by the Federalist Society, Iowa Lawyers Chapter.

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

Time Limits for Judges to Rule

One of the reasons many people support changing to a less insular Kansas Supreme Court selection system is the long time it takes the court to rule in many of its cases.  The Kansas Legislature is considering a bill that would create "soft deadlines" for the state's judges. The Lawrence Journal World reports "Senate Vice President Jeff King says six states have similar laws on time limits, which can withhold pay from judges who are tardy in their rulings."

NYTimes Criticizes Federal Bench for Too Many Corporate Lawyers and Prosecutors

It's not just Republican presidents who appoint corporate attorneys or prosecutors.  The New York Times cites an Alliance for Justice report that says about 85 percent of Mr. Obama’s nominees to the federal bench have been corporate attorneys or prosecutors."  I think the Times is right in saying "though some senators think it’s politically incorrect to say so, a judge’s experience and personal history are, at times, critical to how she or he approaches the job."

Pennsylvania Judicial Retention

Judges in Pennsylvania are elected to vacant seats in partisan elections, but then stand for periodic nonpartisan retention elections.

Pennsylvania Representative Ted Harhai (D) introduced a bill last week that would require judicial retention election ballots to list the party affiliations of judges. "His legislation is a less radical move than separate bills ... that seek to eliminate initial judicial elections — while still preserving retention elections — for statewide judges. The backers of these bills claim that merit selection, rather than added transparency in elections, is key to boosting the public’s trust." according to Law360. 

White House Says "This is the First Time Our Judicial Pool Has Been This Diverse"

President Obama nominated five more people for federal judgeships today.  One "would be the first openly gay male African-American federal district judge" according to the National Law Journal.  Also today, the White House website has nice graphics emphasizing diversity. 

Oklahoma Judicial Selection: Term Limits for Judges?

Member of the Oklahoma bar opposes bill by Oklahoma House Speaker T.W. Shannon to limit judges to 12 years on the bench.  My opinion is that 12 years is about right.  Ideally, starting about age 60 or 65 as the capstone to finish a distinguished career.  If the judge has kids, they're probably grown by then and the judge has moved into a different stage of life with more focus on his or her legacy for future generations.  I don't think a judge should be thinking about his or her next job.  After serving as a judge, should usually come retirement.

School Funding and the Washington State Supreme Court

I've previously noted that the state supreme court's school funding decision frequently comes up in Kansas debates over judicial selection.  The same is apparently true in Washington State.  The Olympia Report says:

Just as importantly, Baumgartner believes it’s time to send a message to the court, which ruled two years ago in the McCleary case that the Legislature wasn’t spending enough money on K-12 education and ordered it to spend more. While many lawmakers might have agreed with that conclusion, it arguably violates the principle of separation of powers for the court to dictate policy to the Legislature.
In fact, the court’s most conservative justice, James Johnson, wrote a scathing opinion earlier this month in which he called his colleagues’ actions unconstitutional.
The court also drew the ire of many last year when it overturned a ballot initiative approved by 64 percent of the voters that required a two-thirds majority in the Legislature to raise taxes.
“Unlike the U.S. Supreme Court, where the justices are appointed to life terms, our justices are elected,” Baumgartner said. “And they’re as political as any of us is.”

Legislature Electing Chief Justice of South Carolina

South Carolina is one of only two states in which the legislature selects the supreme court.  Initial selection of judges this way is one thing, but judicial retention for another term is another.  In SC a sitting chief justice is seeking another term by campaigning within the legislature.  Her opponent: another sitting justice on the court.  More on South Carolina judicial selection here.

Bill to Subject Kansas Judges to Recall Elections

Bill Raftery reports on the recent House Judiciary bill to make Kansas judges subject to recall elections.  Surrounding issues discussed by Peter Hardin here.

Kansas Supreme Court Selection Process Criticized and Defended

Anti-abortion group Kansans for Life announced that one of its top legislative priorities is to switch Kansas Supreme Court selection from its current nominating commission system to a senate confirmation system.  The Topeka Capital Journal reports "Kansans for Life would like a federal-style system, in which the governor makes appointments that require confirmation by the Senate." 

The Cap Journal quotes Kansas Supreme Court Chief Justice Lawton Nuss saying  "I still prefer our present method, which does not allow for special-interest groups to have any impact on the selection of people who eventually become judges".

 TV and other video coverage of Kansas Supreme Court selection is here

 My extensive writing on the topic is here