NCJ Number
60935
Journal
St John's Law Review Volume: 53 Issue: 3 Dated: (SPRING 1979) Pages: 466-516
Date Published
1979
Length
51 pages
Annotation
CONFLICT BETWEEN PROPONENTS OF JUDICIAL MERIT SELECTION APPOINTMENTS IN NEW YORK AND THOSE WHO FAVOR JUDICIAL ELECTIONS IS EVALUATED, AND COMPROMISE REFORMS TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF THE JUDICIARY ARE OFFERED.
Abstract
THE DISPUTE IN JUDGE SELECTION CONCERNS THE FORM AND NATURE THAT REFORM SHOULD TAKE. THE NEED FOR COMPROMISE RESULTS FROM THE CONCLUSION OF MANY THAT THERE WILL BE NO QUICK RESOLUTION OF THE APPOINTMENT VERSUS ELECTION DEBATE. REFORM IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT AT THE TRIAL LEVEL, WHERE THE PUBLIC HAS ACTUAL CONTACT WITH JUDGES AND TRIAL JUDGE PERFORMANCE REPRESENTS THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN THE PUBLIC'S MIND. SEVERAL PARTIAL OR TEMPORARY REFORMS ARE AVAILABLE AND MAY BE ADOPTED TO RESOLVE THE IMPASSE THAT APPEARS TO BE BLOCKING THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE JUDICIAL SELECTION PROCESS. THESE COMPROMISES INCLUDE MANDATORY PRESELECTION SCREENING, ALTERATION OF THE NOMINATING PROCESS, NONPARTISAN ELECTION, LOCAL OPTION (VOTERS OF DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE STATE DETERMINE WHETHER SUPREME COURT AND LOCAL JUDGES SHOULD BE APPOINTED OR ELECTED), PUBLIC SPONSORSHIP OF JUDICIAL CAMPAIGNS, STIMULATION OF BIPARTISAN REPRESENTATION, RETENTION REVIEW AND ELECTION, CONFIRMATION OF JUDGES, ATTRACTION OF BETTER JUDGES THROUGH SALARY AND STAFFING INCENTIVES, AND SPECIALIZATION AND JUDICIAL EDUCATION. CASE LAW IS REVIEWED. (DEP)