This past March, four former Pennsylvania governors drafted a letter urging the state legislature to amend the state’s constitution to replace partisan election of state Supreme Court judges with so-called "merit selection," whereby a nonpartisan judicial nominating commission recommends a slate of qualified nominees, from which the governor makes an appointment.
They argued that "if we embrace merit selection, we will get the most qualified, fair and impartial judges to serve our residents." Meanwhile, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback signed legislation replacing the state’s "merit-selection" system for intermediate appellate judges with the federal model of executive appointment and Senate confirmation. Brownback said the merit-selection system "fails the democracy test" by assigning too much influence to the nonpartisan judicial nominating commission, and voiced support for a constitutional amendment to replace merit selection for the state Supreme Court as well.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
