Law Commons^™

How Biden Began Building Back Better The Federal Bench, Carl Tobias

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

In October 2020, Democratic presidential nominee Joseph Biden famously expressed regret that the fifty-four accomplished, conservative, and young federal appellate court jurists and the 174 comparatively similar district court judges whom former– Republican President Donald Trump and the recent pair of analogous Grand Old Party Senate majorities in the 115th and 116th Congress appointed had left the courts of appeals and the district courts “out of whack.” Lamentable were the numerous detrimental ways in which President Trump and these Republican Senate majorities attempted to undercut the appeals courts and district courts, which actually constitute the tribunals of last resort in …

A Brief History Of Judical Appointments From The Last 50 Years Through The Trump Administration, Donald F. Mcgahn Ii

William & Mary Law Review

Thank you so much for that kind introduction. I really appreciate the opportunity to be here today. I am going to talk about the confirmation process generally. There is no better place to talk about it than here. Let me begin with some numbers and statistics, before I turn to the main thrust of my talk, to give some context as to what recent Presidents have done with respect to judicial appointments. President Trump has appointed two Supreme Court Justices, Neil Gorsuch and Brett of Appeals; twenty-nine so far have been confirmed. The Senate Leader, Senator Mitch McConnell, has already …

Introduction: The Effects Of Selection Method On Public Officials, Clayton J. Masterman

Vanderbilt Law Review

State and local governments have long struggled to design optimal mechanisms for selecting public officials. Centuries of experimentation have left us with several techniques: election (partisan or otherwise), political appointment, or selection by some kind of technocratic commission. Despite our extensive experience with these systems, no consensus has emerged as to which system is best under what circumstances. Several questions remain unclear: What effect does selection method have on the quality of services that public officials provide? Does selection method systematically affect the ideological composition of officials? If so, does that effect matter? And what determines whether a jurisdiction adopts …

Judicial Reform As A Tug Of War: How Ideological Differences Between Politicians And The Bar Explain Attempts At Judicial Reform, Adam Bonica, Maya Sen

Vanderbilt Law Review

What predicts attempts at judicial reform? We develop a broad, generalizable framework that both explains and predicts attempts at judicial reform. Specifically, we explore the political tug of war created by the polarization between the bar and political actors, in tandem with existing judicial selection mechanisms. The more liberal the bar and the more conservative political actors, the greater the incentive political actors will have to introduce ideology into judicial selection. (And, vice versa, the more conservative the bar and the more liberal political actors, the greater incentive political actors will have to introduce ideology into judicial selection.) Understanding this …

Tailored Judicial Selection, Dmitry Bam

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Living With Judicial Elections, Raymond J. Mckoski

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Conversation With Associate Justice Sonya Sotomayor, Justice Sonia Sotomayor

University of Colorado Law Review

No abstract provided.

Building A Bench: A Close Look At State Appellate Courts Constructed By The Respective Methods Of Judicial Selection, Diane M. Johnsen

San Diego Law Review

This Article analyzes detailed career-path and other demographic data to determine the extent to which the various judicial selection methods advance diverse candidates to the bench. The results show many similaritiesamong the mix of objective characteristics found on appellate benches across the states, regardless of selection method, but there are some important differences ... Part I discusses the history of judicial selection in the states and reviews the prior empirical and theoretical literature concerning judicial selection methods and the differences among judges produced by those selection methods, mainly with respect to gender, race, and localism. Part II identifies the data …

Electing Justice Roush To The Supreme Court Of Virginia, Carl Tobias

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

In late April 2015, the Supreme Court of Virginia announced that Justice LeRoy F. Millette, Jr. would retire on July 31, 2015. Democratic Governor Terry McAuliffe expeditiously created an open process for tapping a worthy successor. At July’s conclusion, the Governor appointed Fairfax County Circuit Judge Jane Marum Roush, an experienced, consensus jurist. On a Sunday night, merely two days after Roush swore her oath of office, Republican General Assembly leaders proclaimed their caucuses’ intention to elect another individual, despite conceding that Roush was very qualified. During the August special session, this concerted GOP endeavor prompted a Republican senator to …

Judicial Elections: The Case For Accountability, Jack Park

ConLawNOW

In this article, Jack Park defends the use of partisan elections as a method of selecting state court judges. He first frames the debate and describes its participants. The author then discusses the competing values that supporters and opponents of judicial elections advance. Finally, Mr. Park addresses the arguments for and against judicial elections, showing that, while they may not be a perfect method of selecting judges, neither are the alternatives.

In The Wake Of White: How States Are Responding To Republican Party Of Minnesota V. White And How Judicial Elections Are Changing, Rachel Paine Caufield

Akron Law Review

The selection of state court judges in the United States has been the subject of vigorous debate. The controversy continues to build as some scholars contend that only the appointment of judges ensures the independence of the judiciary by insulating the judge from retaliation for unpopular decisions. Yet volumes of evidence unfold each day to reveal a judiciary under attack for making legal albeit unpopular decisions. While the cloak of a lifetime appointment with no effective method of removal does little to instill confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary, an election riddled with partisan rhetoric or one-sided attacks is …

Financing Ohio Supreme Court Elections 1992-2002: Campaign Finance And Judicial Selection, Nancy Marion, Rick Farmer, Todd Moore

Akron Law Review

The 2000 Ohio Supreme Court election renewed interest in judicial selection reform. The election was noted for interest group issue advocacy and undisclosed campaign spending. Advocacy groups spent millions attempting to unseat incumbent Justice Alice Robie Resnick, leaving the impression that Ohio justice is controlled by special interests and trial lawyers. The uses of negative campaigning and issue advocacy seemed to confirm suspicions that the Ohio Supreme Court had become dependent on campaign contributions from those with cases before the court. After the election, legal academics and public interest organizations began discussing changes to Ohio’s semi-partisan system. Legal scholarship focused …

Commission On The 21st Century Judiciary, Thomas J. Moyer

Akron Law Review

We approach the centennial of one of the most famous critiques of the legal profession with a new set of challenges facing the judiciary. When Roscoe Pound delineated “The Causes of Popular Dissatisfaction with the Administration of Justice” in a 1906 speech to the American Bar Association, he attributed the dissatisfaction to what citizens decried as “the necessarily mechanical operation of legal rules.”

The “arbitrary technicalities,” as Pound described them, are still a frustration for those who represent themselves in legal disputes or those untrained in the liberties protected by those technicalities. Pound also noted that the public is frustrated …

Introduction To The Judicial Symposium, Deborah L. Cook

Akron Law Review

I am pleased to introduce this Judicial Symposium issue of the Akron Law Review. Having twice been elected to Ohio’s Supreme Court, and also having survived the federal judicial-selection process, my “battle scars” alone might qualify me to comment on the Symposium’s broad topic—judicial selection. But my status as an alumna together with my office’s proximity—almost within wireless range of the law school—probably played a larger role than experience and perspective in securing this assignment. The submissions published here pertain to the foundation of the rule of law—public confidence in courts. Each contributor to the Symposium acknowledges the fundamental ideals …

Chooseyourjudges.Org: Treating Elected Judges As Politicians, Ric Simmons

Akron Law Review

In order to combat this problem of voter ignorance, I recently created a website designed to provide voters with information about judicial elections...Creating the website posed unique practical challenges, such as how to gather the information about the candidates and how to present it to the voter in a way that was meaningful and useful to a non-lawyer. But it also raised even more fundamental questions about the purpose of judicial elections and the role voters are meant to play in the process. This Article describes these challenges and questions, and then proposes my own initial solutions to them, in …

Why The Judicial Elections Debate Matters Less Than You Think: Retention As The Cornerstone Of Independence And Accountability, Layne S. Keele

Akron Law Review

This Article attempts to reframe the age-old judicial election arguments into a discussion about the importance of the retention decision, in order to draw out the areas of true disagreement in the judicial independence/judicial accountability debate. I argue that the core difficulties in balancing the desire for judicial independence with the desire for judicial accountability stem primarily from the judicial retention decision, regardless of whether retention is obtained by some form of reelection or through a form of reappointment. I then propose a two-term system for putting judges on state high courts, in which (1) high court judges sit for …

Judicial Selection In Congress’ Lame Duck Session, Carl W. Tobias

Indiana Law Journal

This Article first scrutinizes the Obama Administration confirmation and nomination processes. It then critically explores selection and concludes that Republican obstruction instigated the most open positions the longest time. Because this deficiency undermines swift, economical, and fair case resolution, the Article suggests ideas to promptly decrease the remaining unoccupied judgeships after the session commences.

Nationality And The International Judge: The Nationalist Presumption Governing The International Judiciary And Why It Must Be Reversed, Tom Dannenbaum

Cornell International Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Beyond The City Square: Fishing In Wider Pools Without Soundings, Monica A. Fennell

Fordham Urban Law Journal

Monica Fennell begins a conversation in CITY SQUARE regarding the diversity in the judicial appointment process in the United Kingdom and the United States, a conversation sparked by Professor Judith Maute’s article English Reforms to Judicial Selection: Comparative Lessons for American States?

Issue 4: Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Merit Selection And Performance Evaluation Of Alaska’S Judges, Teresa W. Carns

Alaska Law Review

No abstract provided.

Essentials And Expendables Of The Missouri Plan, The, Sandra Day O'Connor

Missouri Law Review

This speech was presented by Sandra Day O'Connor at the University of Missouri School of Law on February 27, 2009. It is the 2009 Earl F. Nelson Lecture and was part of the symposium titled "Mulling over the Missouri Plan: A Review of State Judicial Selection and Retention Systems." The author has modified the speech and added citations for publication purposes

Parties, Interest Groups, And Systemic Change, Anthony Champagne

Missouri Law Review

If we are going to get from point A to B - if we are going to change a state system of judicial selection - what must be done? How does one get from a judicial election system to a merit-selection system? Generally it is going to take a state constitutional amendment to make the change. That is usually going to mean that a constitutional amendment must be approved by the legislature in order to be submitted to the people for a vote. To do this, key interest groups must be considered. The story of changing to merit selection is …

Reconciling The Judicial Ideal And The Democratic Impulse In Judicial Retention Elections, Rachel Paine Caufield

Missouri Law Review

It is hardly novel to suggest that judicial elections, including retention elections, illustrate profound and irreconcilable tensions in the American governmental scheme. The guiding political philosophy of liberal democracy dictates that judges be insulated from popular will and therefore remain free to adhere to the law, regardless of how unpopular such adherence may be. Complete independence would permit judges to be reckless in their use of the law as a tool of power. Complete accountability would render the rule of law, and the protections it affords to political minorities and others who lack political power, nonexistent. This elusive ideal of …

Missouri Nonpartisan Court Plan: The Least Political Method Of Selecting High Quality Judges, The, Laura Denvir Stith, Jeremy Root

Missouri Law Review

According to Justice Steven Breyer, "the reputation and the reality of the fairness and effectiveness of the American judicial system are in the hands of the states."1 In the laboratory of American democracy, each sovereign state has the freedom to design the method by which members of its judiciary are chosen. The unique history, culture and experiences of each state have led to the adoption of a variety of systems to select judges. These methods generally fall into one of three categories: contested election, political appointment, or merit selection.

Foreword, R. Lawrence Dessem

Missouri Law Review

It is my great pleasure to introduce the Missouri Law Review's 2009 symposium: "Mulling Over the Missouri Plan: A Review of State Judicial Selection and Retention Systems." This has been a labor of love by the entire staff of the Missouri Law Review, and both the February 27 symposium and the written symposium that follows are a work product that should serve as a touchstone for scholars, policy-makers, and all members of the public who are interested in state judicial selection and retention systems and the current efforts to amend and extend those systems.

We Have Met The Special Interests, And We Are They, Michael R. Dimino Sr.

Missouri Law Review

I have two major points. First, because there is no such thing as a general interest, it makes no sense to speak of "special" interests. Second, judicial decisions make policy. In so doing, they benefit certain interests at the expense of others, whether judges are selected by elections, appointments, or some hybrid system. So, it should not be surprising that politics pervades the choice of judges under every system used or considered today. No selection system may be capable of eliminating the power of interest groups, but the selection system may determine which of those interests are benefited. As a …

Comments On The White, Caufield, And Tarr Articles, Duane Benton

Missouri Law Review

These three articles are valuable additions to the literature on retention elections. I am honored to comment, understanding I was chosen because I have survived merit selection (both as an applicant and as chair of the commission), a retention election, federal appointment, various roles in partisan elections, and an undergraduate political-science, voter-behavior education

Plea For Reality, A, Roy A. Schotland

Missouri Law Review

Thank you for the privilege and the pleasure of joining you, in the best possible state for any discussion of judicial selection and blessedly at a distinguished law school. For me, after twenty-five years of involvement in the judicial election scene and four weeks after retiring from teaching - but not, I hope, from continued involvement - this is a unique opportunity to share views, air questions, consider the ever-evolving changes and challenges, and speak bluntly on a few points. I treasure the friendships I have built with others similarly involved, and I hope that my comments, some of which …

Do Retention Elections Work, G. Alan Tarr

Missouri Law Review

During the twentieth century, judicial reformers attempting to depoliticize the selection of state court judges and increase respect for the courts advocated moving from competitive elections for judges to "merit selection" or - as it was initially known - the "Missouri Plan." During the 1960s and 1970s, these reformers enjoyed considerable success. Whereas in 1960 only three states - Alaska, Kansas, and Missouri - employed merit selection to choose state supreme court justices, by 1980 eighteen did so. Of course, adoption of merit selection did not altogether eliminate judicial elections, because judges appointed under merit selection are in most states …