The Pros And Cons Of Judicial Selection Methods

462 Words2 Pages

When people think of a good judge they typically think of somebody who is fair, not bias and has some sort of experience. However, in today’s society, particularly in the United States, our judicial selection methods are not made to select judges on their ability to reason well and rule impartially (Carter and Burke, 6). On top of that, judges have no actual training before they become part of the judiciary. The only training they receive is in school when they are studying the law. Sometimes when they pursue an apprenticeship with a judge they also get a little bit more experience or insight into a judge’s job. In addition to judicial selection methods, at the federal level, the president and senate get to appoint seats to judges, in which they will have for life. In my opinion, I think this selection method is good to some extent because I trust that the president and senate have good judgment when it comes to picking judges that will be independent, fair, and accountable. At the state level, electing judges varies from state to state. In …show more content…

For instance, I believe that the federal selection system should not allow judges to have the seat for life. Once a judge reaches the retirement age of 65 they should have to step down. This is because after a certain point of serving as a judge, people start to lose interest or they tend not to care as much. When their age is also put into this situation they tend to not know what is going on. They lose the ability to focus and retain what is happening in a case. I also believe that people wanting to become a judge should have to as a requirement shadow a judge simply to gain experience on how to handle different cases. They must learn how to be a fair mediator when it comes to cases because if not then they will have a two against one situation, which is not good for a judge to be

Open Document