On September 10, 2013, Hecht was appointed Chief Justice by Governor Rick Perry and sworn in by retiring Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson on October 1, 2013. One proposed change, submitted by Governor Cuomo, would merge most of the maze of lower courts into the Supreme Court, now the . Only six states, including Texas, elect justices in a partisan race. Full transparency is essential. Additionally, judges are rarely removed when they stand for retention, and frequently don't have opposition in elections, so merit selection often results in what amounts to life tenure for judges. In fact, during election years, judges are more likely to hand down rulings are too harsh for the crime committed simply because they want to prove to the community that they are hard on crime. Appointed judges are appointed for life, so it is possible that I think there is too much information out there and another thing that might be the reason this is happening is because candidates insult other candidates with their campaign ads. Find their verified websites and social media accounts, read past news stories, and learn where they stand on the issues that are important to you. Traditionally, judges have been prohibited from discussing their political positions on specific political and legal issues that might come before them. In 12 other states, judges are elected, but the elections are nonpartisan, which means the judges do not reveal their political affiliation. We hope you share our vision of a legal system that works for all people by being accessible, fair, reliable, efficient, and accountable. Full-time judges should be elected, but part-time judges should be appointed. ~nFZsB5R3$D= +KnR)~tBn~'l%!Gv When the people appoint judges, it creates greater transparency within the government. Why Having a Business Succession Plan is Important, 5 Legal Concerns for Owners of Waterfront Property, Enjuris: Directory for Personal Injury Lawyers, Firefighters Could Receive Workers Comp for PFAS in Turnout Gear, Illinois Man Loses Both Legs but Wins $91 Million from 7-Eleven, Hazmat Train: Derailment Causes Health Risks in Ohio Town, Enjuris Interview: Meet South Carolina Workers Compensation and Personal Injury Lawyer George Taylor, New Colorado Law Extends Workers Comp Reporting Time, Stephanie Tucker Receives WILGs 2021 Rising Star Award, Mack Babcock Swears In As President of WILG, A National Non-Profit for Injured Workers, Wall Street Journal Interviews Mack Babcock About COVID-19 Workers Comp Claims Denials, Dogs Object to Bill Making It Illegal to Stick Their Heads Out of Car Windows, Bill Would Establish Official State Aroma. As times change with the generations, these constitutions are often updated. Elections ensure the independence of the judiciary. If a Justice was allowed to do this, black rights would never have been established, the rights for gays to get married would never have passed and women may have never been able to vote or be paid accordingly. "Spanking And Child Discipline-The Pros And Cons". The impact would be enormous if the Supreme Court justices had to be elected to office by the people. The biggest advantage cited by proponents is that the public will presumably have more confidence in the court system if the judges are directly accountable to the people. There are several different versions of the plan, but the general idea is that instead of each justice being nominated, confirmed, and appointed for. Lol I must admit I am one of those who feel that judges and other government officials are in the pockets of large corporations. There are no pros or cons. And also to protect our Supreme Judges from political pressure. States began to create their own constitutions. This is to assure judicial independence. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the partisan election. But there is evidence suggesting that what really happens is that judges start to incorporate public sentiment in controversial decisions. she asks. Lim points out that governors have an advantage when appointing judges because they are likely to have more accurate information about the political preferences and sentencing approaches of a candidate than is generally available to voters during a campaign. This has been enhanced by the process of . Those who support electing judges indicate that the benefits include allowing voters the opportunity to provide accountability through self-government by the voters, awareness of the political preferences of judges to the voters, and more public control of a judicial system that is dealing with aggressive lawsuits, such as the recent tobacco and ongoing gun cases. x]}[$@ssbqn<9*'_ d7u\.\1?9Toy]u;x(|cu*gO`9O~_~sz`O>9~qwzYr7t.+S/[k;yQ7K/gOwo\Ntc_^w8SNBh4O6;xWM{(^Bw])SvoSWeO6z6u0s3]KG* H>qNxm\}6c.LXYF.S_UL$n`+~:?jlA}E{g30L2E:/ajiU Ym7&FXzVmCY[(OUdRQi3RuPd_&[ [u:^(N~%iH1dah3uY-e34Hb {IPp?~O'tUDdTVVgB t &J9h(-SyQNB(Q2!$Api 1 u[[4DZ{&BQ6Xy>9P%(S!cI]"_i(=&^Jv:d8kI%H $Y U2yc0n#y&9g ]>p~} i`Cm>ei3hYam gk?aF@B7 The structure of the system is laid out in Article 5 of the Texas Constitution. You made a good statement when you said that when voting for a judge, you have to find the right judge that is able to carry out his job without being influenced by, The Supreme Court justices are appointed in the same manner as all Federal Constitutional Judges, by the President with the advise of the U.S. Senate for life terms without a reduction in pay. Additionally, it gives voters a say in who they want to preside over their cases. But what attorney is going to risk antagonizing a future judge by saying something negative during a campaign? What did the Nazis begin using gas chambers instead of mobile killing units and shooting squads after a while? The chances of the voting process In early 1900's, faded and became the democratic party. The pros and cons of judicial elections is that they can ensure that the judges is accountable for his or her actions in court because the people who selected the judge for his or her vote allows each candidate to be screened and the cons of judicial elections is that the judiciary can be partisan which the people can't have a direct say so in Appointing judges further perpetuates that belief. As we know in the Article III of the U.S constitution says that all judges in the Supreme Court and Inferior Courts can have their jobs for the rest of their life. Lim points out that public critique during a campaign is a disincentive to lawyers to seek office; this can result in the best candidate for a judgeship declining to compete for the position. The reasons that the judges can lose their job is by retirement or if they have been accused of any crime., The judicial philosophies of the justices in the United States Supreme Court differ from one another. I juggle work, the kid's activities, family life, and blogging. The pros of electing judges in Texas are that it allows for more accountability and transparency in the judicial system. Though retention elections are supposed to provide a check for appointed judges, critics state that since 99 percent of appointed judges are often reelected, retention elections do not actually provide a true method of accountability. In traditional economic thought, competition is always good, and just as it's good for the economy, competitive elections should also make things better. On the down side, critics indicate that judges should spend their time reducing the backlog of cases rather than campaigning for office, that elections force candidates to solicit campaign contributions from lawyers and possible litigants, and candidates may wind up deep in debt or may lack sufficient money to properly inform the voters of their merits. They believe that there are certain rules and restrictions that are outdated and should be revised. The lack of opposition means that the accountability described above is eliminated altogether in some situations. Contrasting viewpoints try to decide on whether the voting system should be partisan or nonpartisan bringing much debate in the election of the judicial candidates. If you were mayor of your city, what changes would you suggest/recommend? . Elections ensure that judges are accountable to the people. Election: In nine states, judges run as members of a political party. Busy blogger and mom of two girls! The involvement of a jury is important because it allows for a fair conclusion to trials., The Founders of our nation understood that no idea was more central to our Bill of Rights -- indeed, to government of the people, by the people, and for the people -- than the citizen jury. I gained some knowledge here! In the next couple paragraphs I will talk more specifically about these topics. Secondly, younger Americans are more cynical and disconnected from politics than ever. Levingson claims life tenure for Supreme Court justices "is an idea whose time has passed, and it offers a good reason for any concerned citizen to be dissatisfied with the constitution" (Levingson, p.126)., Before the election, if President Obama was not able to get the Senate to approve his United States Supreme Court applicant, the next president would potentially be responsible for filling the vacant spots on the court over the term due to possible retirements and deaths. The jury system provides a definitive conclusion to the innocence of those who have been accused of a crime. The two most common methods of selecting state judges (as opposed to federal judges) are election and merit selection. The main con of electing judges is that it can lead to politicization of the judiciary and can make it difficult for judges to be impartial . Jell-O Simply Good: No Artificial Dyes, Colors, or Preservatives! But there are other issues with electing judges: When you elect judges in the same way you elect politicians, they tend to act like politicians. General Election Ballot Question Pamphlet . What is the answer punchline algebra 15.1 why dose a chicken coop have only two doors? Those who oppose merit selection argue it is the right of citizens to vote for all office-holders, including judges, and that politics is still pervasive in the nominating process, but is more difficult to monitor. "Accountable" judges would vote strategi-cally by following constituency preferences, while independent judges would vote their own preferences. Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty Pros 1. This means that the Constitution should be open to modification and modernization according to the demands of contemporary times. The Death Penalty allows families that have been suffering some closure. First, many citizens say that who is elected in office is not as important as it once was. Elected judges rely on being liked by the people to remain in office, and sometimes that pressure to be liked is reflected in their court decisions. Another advantage sometimes discussed with respect to having some form of election of judges is that such systems promote a more dynamic, responsive judiciary. In Legislative elections, selection. The problem is basically this: Judges are suppose to be "Independent". Also, voters need to know the background information on the judges instead of randomly picking whoever they want to, base on their indifferent feelings. Jury trials should remain an option. One study reviewed death penalty appeal cases across the country over a 15-year period. Five states have gubernatorial or legislative appointments without a nominating commission, 16 states have merit selection through a nominating commission, and nine states (including Florida) have combined merit selection and other methods to select their judges. He then secured his fifth six-year term on November 6, 2012. In the past, Hecht was a partner in what is now known as the Locke Lord firm, practicing mainly in the area of general business and commercial litigation. This makes it far more likely that a judge will be invested in their community and care more about the fair application of law than protecting narrow special interests. Rather than focus on donations and endorsements from corporations to ensure appointment, they must prove fairness and adherence to the law to keep citizens invested in keeping them in the courtroom. the election process is the only check and balance to counter purely political appointments, whether the appointee is qualified (or not). These constitutions followed the federal standards set by the United States constitution, yet made different situations in each state clearer and gave specific instructions for certain situations. Some cities, counties, and states use partisan elections while others use non-partisan elections. I also agree when you stated that no one will ever find a judge that doesn't have to fight with a little bit of influence, but it is what the judge does with his decisions. The first problem goes to the availability of information. It ensures that they maintain high ethical standards and follow the constitution to the end for fear of being voted out if they do the contrary. Every single elected judge is appointed, not elected, and Supreme Court judges are selected forever, with the plan of expelling the judiciary from the pressure of electoral politics permitting insurance of minority interests in government system intended to rule. What are the Biggest Problems with the American Jury System? Its nice to think that having a judge who is a pillar of the community will give them the security and credibility to make unpopular decisions. Want to get paid to blog about DeSantis? The five main methods are partisan elections, nonpartisan elections, legislative elections, Gubernational appointment, and assisted appointment., The purpose of law is to define behavior and conduct that is acceptable in a society. During election years, judges are more likely to rule in accordance with the popular opinion of citizens rather than what is legally fair or right. w69"""eUFeyj@uf$}KxPg?>(JEz Q3E!8(-iOBEwk^7/!=t%[ In your opinion,does our state legislature work for the needs of the citizens of Texans? Elections ensure that judges are accountable to the people. However, the constitution was immensely broad when it came to certain topics. Federal judges are appointed by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Is the singer Avant and R Kelly brothers? The appointed judge will subsequently stand for election with no party affiliation, and will be retained if a certain percentage of the vote is received. Also, another headline happening not too long ago, involving Chief Justice Nathan Hecht about the fine settling charges that he broke state campaign finance laws represents another impact he had on our state. What Does Snapchat Liability Case Mean for Section 230? The 2020 election year is well underway, which means youve probably been considering where to cast your vote. Dallas: Newstex. Why do we do this? Without Juries in my opinion it would be totally unfair to go off of what one person thinks. They further argue that even if a judge remains impartial, elections create anappearanceof impropriety that damages the public'sperceptionof the judiciary. Because not enough people enter the campaigns, it means that many judges end up in their positions for years or even decades, even if they arent doing well at their jobs. Judges who were there by appointment reversed the sentence more than a quarter of the time. Appointment based systems do a better job than electoral systems of keeping the judiciary from being politicized. In theory, the concept of electing judges seems fair. If they have to run for elections, they are subject to the public for their retention. In opposition to most states, Texas is one of a handful to do partisan elections to vote for judges. Appealing to the public is also a double-edged sword. However, re-election concerns may have the drawback of reducing the quality of judges in an electoral system by discouraging qualified candidates who are doing well in the private sector from holding office. Let's take a look at open vs. primary elections, which select the nominations of parties participating in the general election. Learn how your comment data is processed. It's all too easy for an unelected judiciary to lose. The judges in my home state of Texas were appointed by the governor since the year of 1876 but, the judges in the higher district of courts were elected by the people in partisan elections in the. Many have failed, been rejected and have given up, while others take rejection has a reason to fight harder and fix the Judicial system., We need Justices in the courts to put their jobs and the needs of the people before themselves and any of their personal biases. Get Cornell news delivered right to your inbox. In Nonpartisan elections: Judges are elected by the population, without any knowledge of their political affiliation. It was cherished not only as a bulwark against tyranny but also as an essential means of educating Americans in the habits and duties of citizenship. Like most everything else, the wisdom of the populace directly choosing those that will judge them is frequently debated. We find some are on the liberal side, some are conservative, while others are more on the moderate side. Continue Learning about American Government. Here are some of the pros and cons of electing judges. Dating back to Andrew Jackson, Texas has used the long ballot in order to create a democratic society. EDITOR'S NOTE: This is the last of six guest columns written by Hernando County Bar Association members and published on this page during Law Week, which began Sunday. The Pros and Cons of Electing Judges The 2020 election year is well underway, which means you've probably been considering where to cast your vote. Many people are unaware of how little they understand about the world and the law that applies to the society in order to prevent conflict. You can check out the pros and cons and make your own decision. "Hot coffee" shows other side of "frivolous" lawsuits, New HBO film "hot coffee" shows texas' role in campaign to limit lawsuits against business, (2011).