About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

67 Alb. L. Rev. 793 (2003-2004)
Examining the Decline in Support for Merit Selection in the States

handle is hein.journals/albany67 and id is 807 raw text is: EXAMINING THE DECLINE IN SUPPORT FOR MERIT SELECTION IN THE STATES Seth Andersen* Popular support for constitutional change from judicial elections to merit selection systems has declined significantly over the past three decades.1 The last state to adopt a merit selection system by constitutional amendment was New Mexico in 1988, and that was a compromise measure that retained contested partisan elections following initial appointment.2 Between 1940 and 1988, fifteen states adopted constitutional amendments to replace judicial elections with some type of merit-selection system for some or all levels of courts.3 Of these fifteen states, five completely abolished contested judicial elections; the remaining ten kept contested elections for some or all of their trial court judgeships. The 1960s and 1970s were the real heyday of merit selection, with twelve of the fifteen constitutional amendments occurring between 1960 and 1977.4 Five other state constitutions include merit selection provisions, but all of these states had existing systems of * Project Manager, Standing Committee on Judicial Independence, American Bar Association. The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the official positions or policies of the American Bar Association. For the purposes of this article, the term merit selection is used to refer to appointive state judicial selection systems in which a nominating commission screens applicants and provides a short list of names to the appointing authority, usually the governor, who makes the final appointment. Under this definition, merit selection systems may or may not include such features as uncontested retention elections to secure additional terms, legislative confirmation of appointees, or reappointment and reconfirmation of judges for additional terms. 2 See Anthony Champagne, The Politics of Judicial Selection, 31 POLW STUD. J. 413, 413 (2003). 3 See AMERICAN JUDICATURE SOCIETY, JUDICIAL MERIT SELECTION: CURRENT STATUS Table 1 (2003), available at http://www.ajs.org/selection/sel-stateselect.asp (last visited Mar. 29, 2004) (listing the dates of adoption of constitutional merit selection provisions). The fifteen states that adopted constitutional amendments for merit selection of some or all state judges between 1940 and 1988 were, in order of adoption: Missouri (1940), Indiana (1960), Iowa (1962), Nebraska (1962), Colorado (1967), Oklahoma (1967), Utah (1967), Tennessee (1971), Florida (1972), Kansas (1972), Wyoming (1973), Arizona (1974), New York (1977), South Dakota (1980), and New Mexico (1988). Id. 4 See id.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most