No Judgment For Judges

Gansler's plan for judicial elections could rob citizens of any meaningful oversight

Maryland Attorney General Douglas Gansler recently proposed ending democratic elections for circuit court judges across the state. But the system he proposes -- known by advocates as "merit" selection -- will make judges less accountable and more prone to the type of judicial activism that continues to erode confidence in our legal system nationwide.

Under "merit" selection, judges are chosen by a small panel controlled by legal elites, rather than voters. Favored candidates are then sent to the governor, who must choose from the approved slate. Judges chosen under "merit" selection never face contested elections, just retention ballots where citizens can only vote "yes" or "no."

Mr. Gansler suggests that a retention election "offers [voters] a tool to hold the judge accountable." Actually, retention elections practically assure a lifetime appointment to the bench.

Of the 6,309 judges who ran in retention elections in the U.S. between 1964 and 2006, more than 99 percent were re-elected, according to an article by Professor Larry Aspin of Bradley University. Vanderbilt Law Professor Brian Fitzpatrick found that 145 out of 146 Tennessee judges were retained in a study he published on that state's experiment with "merit" selection

GO HERE to read more.