Judges are chosen in a variety of ways. The president appoints Federal Courts judges, with the advice and permission of the Senate. The states courts are appointed by the governor; merit selection, where the governor appoints a judge from a list of names submitted by a special nominating commission; appointment by the legislature; partisan election, where the candidates political affiliations are mentioned on the ballot; and nonpartisan election, where no political party is mentioned. Each state within the United States has its own unique judicial selection process within its own court system.
In this paper I will, Discuss the judicial selection process of my state, choose a second state, and describe the qualifications and the selection
…show more content…
It was established to recommend candidates to fill vacancies on the Georgia Supreme Court, Georgia Court of Appeals, Superior courts and State courts (judicialselection.us; 2016). The commission put in a recommendation for five candidates to the governor for each judicial vacancy. But fewer will be recommended if there are less than five qualified. In 2009, the state 's Democratic congressional delegation selected a twelve-member panel to screen applicants and recommend nominees for federal district judge, prosecutor, and marshal vacancies in the state (judicialselection.us; 2016). The Georgia Constitution establishes the various trial and appellate courts that make up the state’s judicial system and outlines the qualifications for service of its judges. Curiously, at least to the uninitiated, it provides for nonpartisan elections for terms of four years for trial judges and six years for appellate jurists (Markle, Todd; July 12, 2013).
The highest court in the state of Georgia is the Supreme Court. This court is generally the last word, although decisions may be petitioned for appeal to the United States Supreme Court if they involve federal constitutional law. Georgia Supreme Court has seven justices and they are chosen by popular vote in nonpartisan elections. The Court of Appeals has statewide appellate jurisdiction of all cases except those involving constitutional
…show more content…
In comparison, both New York and Georgia have age requirements and years of law experience needed to become a judge. They both can also be appointed or elected as judges. In contrast, New York runs under their political party. In Georgia, the judicial qualifications commission may discipline, retire, or remove a judge from the bench (judicialselection.us; 2016). The Supreme Court must review all removal and retirement decisions. There can be three ways to remove judges in the State of New York. Judges may be admonished, censured, retired, or removed from office by the commission on judicial conduct in which the commission’s disciplinary actions are subject to review by the court of appeals (judicialselection.us;
When it came to the judicial branch, the delegates chose to have judges elected by popular vote, in contrast with the previous constitution where judges were appointed by the governor. Additionally, the delegates created a court of appeals which was made up of three judges and would handle criminal cases so that the Supreme Court could focus on civil
This system permits parties to present their cases, and the judge or jury reaches a verdict based on the evidence and arguments provided. Nevertheless, the adversarial system guarantees that both sides of the case are heard, and the decision-making process is transparent and impartial, as it exposes the weaknesses and strengths of each side’s arguments. One significant difference between the two court systems is the method of selecting judges. In the federal system, judges are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, while in Texas, judges are elected by popular vote. This selection process can result in different types of judges, with federal judges typically being selected based on their legal expertise and experience, whereas Texas judges may be more influenced by political factors and public opinion.
Currently, California uses term limits for assigning state judges. Judges can be removed by a Committee on Judicial Performance and must run for election every 6 years. The recent scandal of Justice Clarence Thomas being “treated to luxury vacations by billionaire Republican donor Harlan Crow” for over 20 years highlights the need for reform to the Supreme Court (Clarence Thomas Secretly Accepted Luxury Trips From GOP Donor). This event has further damaged the public’s perception of the Supreme Court and damages the overall integrity of the Judicial Branch. As a result, the proposal of 18-year term limits for Justices have quickly gained popularity.
It takes a lot for a justice to be appointed. First, all justices must be trained in law before being appointed. “Like all federal judges, justices are appointed by the President and are confirmed by the Senate. They, typically, hold office for life.” (uscourts.gov, N.D.)
The quality of judges would without a doubt increase if they were appointed. However, I do not agree with the idea of judges being appointed. When looking at the partisan aspect you notice several possible issues with one issue being, is that individual the right person to do the job. Partisan election of judges allows for an individual that may not be as qualified for the job to be elected into the position. Nevertheless the partisan election of judges gives the voters what they want based on party affiliation along with qualifications.
Judges of Texas are elected, all the way to the Supreme Courts. Starting with the lowest court the justice of the peace, the qualifications to become a judge a very simple. First officials must be a United States citizen, a resident of the state of Texas, and a resident of their district for at least one year and only 18 years of age. This may seem to be young but I met some 18-year-olds who are more mature than some 30-year-olds I have met. And as far as education goes they only have to go to the Texas justice Center chords training center in Austin Texas for two weeks.
The article Broken Bench explains the controversy over having “tiny courts” in New York State. The author, William Glaberson argues that the idea of justice within the jurisdiction of these tiny courts is unfairly decided among the justices in charge. Due to the lack of experience of these justices, it is difficult for fair justice to be dealt out. One of the major causes explained by the author for unfair justice is that the justices of the court are very inexperienced. For example, William Glaberson states, “Nearly three-quarters of the judges are not lawyers, and many — truck drivers, sewer workers or laborers — have scant grasp of the most basic legal principles.
The Court’s effectiveness relies on the institutional capacities as well as the ruling’s popularity. When lower-court judges comply with Supreme Court decisions, rulings can have a substantial effect on social policies, as in the case
The three levels within the federal courts are: the U.S. Magistrate Courts, the U.S. District Courts, the U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. The magistrate courts are the lowest level and as such are limited to trying misdemeanors, setting bail amounts and assisting the district courts. The U.S. District Courts are the federal branch of original jurisdiction courts. These are responsible for criminal trials and giving guilty or not guilty verdicts. The U.S. Courts of Appeals are responsible for all the appeals from U.S. district courts.
On March 3, Adams, in an attempt to prevent the incoming Democratic-Republican Congress and administration, appointed 16 Federalist circuit judges and 42 Federalist justices of the peace to offices created by the Judiciary Act of 1801. There
In the state of Texas there are two courts of final appeal. The highest court for civil matters is the nine member Texas Supreme Court. The nine member Texas Court Criminal Appeals is for criminal matters. The number and variety of courts are confusing to the average citizen. The judges in these courts have only general qualifications who need not be lawyers and these judges are selected in a partisan election, which is a general election where the candidates are nominated by the political parties and their respective party labels appear on the ballot.
The people who serve are called associate justices. There are 8 of them ,and one leader a total of 9! The leader is called the chief justices are approved by the president and the senate they serve for life .They can only lose their job by impeachment .There are 12 court of appeals , There are 2 important legal concepts. Amendments
Judicial selection is an intriguing topic as there are multiple ways that judges take their seat on the bench. The United States Constitution spells out how federal judges are selected and leaves it up to the individual states to establish their means for selecting judges. In federal courts, judges are appointed and it varies between appointment and election for state courts. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between appointments and elections (as well as the multiple types of elections) and to give an opinion as to which is the better alternative. Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States and are confirmed on the advice and consent of the United States Senate.
The Supreme Court is made up of nine judges. The Cabinet Council selects the judges with the help of the Legislative Branch for a ten-year period. Each judge must be a native Panamanian and must be thirty-five years of age. However, there is no specific limit to judges at any one time. There are also five Superior Courts of Judicial District consisting of nineteen Magistrates and Circuit and Municipal Courts.
As of December 2015 there are six vacancies, which then President Kirchner stated she did not intend to fill. The supreme court is the highest court of law and functions as a last resort tribunal, its rulings cannot be appealed. It also decides on cases dealing with the interpretation of the constitution. A member of the supreme court holds office for