The Judicary

                My community partner does not directly work with the judicial process to resolve problems, nor does she work with the prison system in any way. The closest thing to using the judicial system is the fact that many of the students at this alternative school have been in previous run-ins with the law. Also, students may face having to go through the judicial process to resolve any truancy issues, as it is punishable by law. However, this all takes place at the most local system of the judiciary branch.

                I think it is interesting to look at the various ways in which judges are appointed to positions whether it is at the local or state level. Many states use the merit system which is used to combine the nominating of a judge, the approval from the governor and then accountability by the citizens. There are also variations on this merit plan that will adapt to the state’s needs. The merit system is interesting because it incorporates the elements of non-partisanship and accountability by the people. I think that it is important for judges to be held accountable by the people because otherwise the people cannot speak their voice about how their feel about certain issues. However, most voters do not attempt to get rid of the incumbent judge unless it is a controversial issue that is decided in a unfavorable way. It must be a high-profile issue and decision in order to vote a judge out.

                In the case of judges who are only appointed by the governor, there seem to be accountability problems. That judge is only really accountable to the individual who put that judge into office. A gubernational appointment can also be seen as a political favor by appointing someone that the governor may own. An appointment can also be used to satisfy party leaders or voters in certain regions. According to the author, the gubernational process is actually the most common way for a judge to be appointed to an appellate or major trial court. There is no accountability to the voters in this method of appointment because they are not subject to an election. In addition, even if a state uses the merit system, a governor has the ability to appoint a new judge in an internment term after one retires. This will give a judge incumbency to help them be more likely to be elected.

                For those states that elect judges into their appointment, there are also problems. There is often a lot of campaign funding that comes into play. This can subject an election to bias based on the amount of money that one candidate may have. There is also low voter turn out to elect judges because it is not a position that is really in the spotlight. In addition, campaign money will often come from individuals that are heavily invested in the outcome. For example, major law firms, corporations and lawyers may contribute to the judge that will most heavily favor them because they will have to deal with them in court. These individuals will want to have a person in the judge’s seat that is going to rule in their favor. In this way, the election of a judge could be a reflection of the opinion of a few individuals as opposed to being that of the majority.

                The most important thing to learn here is that the appointments in the judicial branch should be free from partisanship, money, favors and any other biases that could occur. Money in the election of judges could corrupt the system. In addition, the appointment of judges by political favor could also corrupt the system if it is done from a partisan stand point. Regardless, personal opinions and views will always come into play in the minds of the judges. The important thing is appointing someone to be judge who will do their best to rule by the law and not by their own bias.