Rep. Fry has introduced House Joint Resolution 9 which provides for direct election of state Supreme Court Justices. Of the five, three would be from particular geographic districts and two would be elected at-large. To be eligible, the candidate would have to have been admitted to the practice of law for 10 years or a trial court judge for 5 years.
I’m not a fan. Direct election of the Supreme Court seems like it would politicize the office in a way I don’t think I would like. That said, the current retention system we have seems like something of a farce. I don’t know that any judge has ever lost a retention vote.
As a matter of principle, I always vote against retention of those judges. I know they’ll be retained but at the same time, they shouldn’t feel too cocky and assured of total insulation from public opinion… I hope it keeps them on their toes!
Chief Justice Randall Shepard gave a speech at IU some years ago where he talked about the practice of electing the judiciary. He said that in local elections, this can be a good idea, but he excoriated the election of state supreme court justices.
This additional idea of geographic distribution is particularly stupid.
I would rather move in the direction away from election of trial court judges, so unsurprisingly I’m opposed to this idea. For what it’s worth, I heard that Michigan recently threw a justice off the court, so it’s not unheard of.
I’m really disgusted with Marion County’s system. The slating process means that if no one runs against the slate, every Democrat and every Republican wins. That means that instead of finding the best candidates, it simply becomes a spoils system. They hold up the candidates for an exorbitant slating fee, and is has more to do with politics than anything else. Marion County recently lost Ken Johnson, one of the most esteemed and experienced trial court judges in the state, because he didn’t kiss enough a$$ on the Republican rubber chicken circuit. There’s simply no non-political reason for not slating Johnson, particularly given the mediocrities that both parties keep slating election after election.
It is true that no appellate judge or justice has failed to be retained since we instituted the current system in the ’70s. However, it is also true that there has been not even a hint of scandal around the appellate courts, and, AFAIK, no real reason for dissatisfaction with the courts. I think if there any suggestion of improper behavior, incompetence, or just general wrong-headedness, the retention vote would have bite.
Could a judge run as an independent or 3rd party candidate?
This is truly one of the dumber ideas to come from the GA and they’ve sent out some doozies. Luckily, they will have little time for such tomfoolery. Yes, I called it tomfoolery — mainly because I am folksy and I can.
Must be the friggin’ cold. Mind is NUMB.
Does anyone here vote themselves, or know anyone, to retain any judges. Like Wilson I, along with all my family and friends vote NOT to retain. Everyone I have ever asked about it votes to NOT retain.
And like Wilson it’s simply principle. I have nothing against these judges, but who does vote for them.
I vote to retain most of them, and vote against retaining some of them. But I used to do appellate law, so I have appeared before most of the judges and justices and have my own opinion about each of them.
However, for 99.99% of the regular population, and for probably 95% of the population of lawyers, it is pretty difficult to to form an opinion about the judges/justices.