Partner News

"JudgesOnMerit and other like-minded groups and coalitions across the country are working hard to spread the message that judges, particularly at the appellate level, should not be elected. Instead, we argue, for each vacancy, judicial candidates should be screened by a non-partisan citizen panel representing the diverse spectrum of interests in the community, which will then pass on a few names of highly qualified individuals from which the governor will nominate one.This nominee would be subject to Senate confirmation. The public would have input in the vetting process, and will have the ultimate say in retention elections, where, after 4 years in office, voters would decide whether the judge would serve on the bench for a full ten-year term.The primary reason for the impassioned calls to end appellate judicial elections is because the judiciary is different from the other branches of government."

"That famous definition of a cynic as someone who knows the price of everything -- and the value of nothing -- has come to define this present moment of American politics. No wonder people have lost faith in politicians, parties and in our leadership. The power of money drives cynicism deep into the heart of every level of government. Everything, and everyone, comes with a price tag attached: from a seat at the table in the White House to a seat in Congress, to the fate of health care reform, our environment, and efforts to restrain Wall Street's greed and prevent another financial catastrophe. (Later in the post) In the words of Charles W. Hall, a spokesman for the non-partisan, judicial watchdog group Justice at Stake, "Corporate bottom lines are not affected by whether a bank robber gets 10 or 20 years in prison. The bottom lines are affected however by whether a large scale lawsuit is upheld or overturned."" Click here to read more.

"BATON ROUGE, La. -- U.S. Sen. David Vitter said Monday he'll stop delaying President Barack Obama's nominees to be federal prosecutors and judges in Louisiana. Vitter, a Republican, had blocked Senate confirmation of the nominees from his home state because he wanted assurances the White House wouldn't get rid of U.S. Attorney Jim Letten, a holdover Bush administration appointee in the New Orleans-based Eastern District. Vitter said Monday that he's confident Letten will stay because U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder named him to a committee that advises the attorney general on policy, management and operational issues. Letten's appointment to that committee will expire in 2011." Click here to read more.

"Last Tuesday, a little known court — the Court of Military Commissions Review — convened to hear appeals in the cases of the only two men sentenced in the Military Commission trial system established by Congress in 2006, after the first version, conceived by Vice President Dick Cheney and his close advisors in November 2001, was ruled illegal by the US Supreme Court. The two men in question — Salim Hamdan and Ali Hamza al-Bahlul — were tried and convicted in 2008, but whereas Hamdan, a driver for Osama bin Laden, had the major charge against him (conspiracy) dismissed by a military jury in August 2008, and was sentenced to serve just six months for providing material support to terrorism, al-Bahlul, who made a video promoting al-Qaeda and is regularly described as al-Qaeda’s “media secretary,” was convicted of conspiracy, solicitation of murder, and providing material support to terrorism, and received a life sentence in November 2008." Click here to read more.

The Citizens United ruling has sparked a torrent of comment, and widespread criticism. In a press release, Justice at Stake says the need for election reform is "more urgent than ever." To learn more, see a special online video section, including a TV interview with the Brennan Center's Monica Youn, and read today's Gavel Grab report.

JAS and the Brennan Center have submitted testimony on the Wisconsin Supreme Court's proposed changes to recusal rules. The full testimony can be accessed online by clicking here, or going to www.justiceatstake.org. Previous testimony submitted by Justice at Stake can be accessed by clicking here.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court process has generated extensive publicity, which can be accessed at JAS’s Gavel Grab blog (www.gavelgrab.org). The court was expected to approve new rules at a Jan. 21, 2010, hearing.

Lynn Marks and Shira Goodman of our partner group, Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts, wrote this editorial to the Philadelphia Daily News: LAST TUESDAY's judicial elections resulted in one new Supreme Court justice, six appellate judges and many more trial judges. Some are pleased with the results, others disappointed. But, overall,...

An op-ed written by Andrea Kaminski, Executive Director of the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin Education Fund, for the Manitowoc Herald Times Reporter is highly critical of the Wisconsin Supreme Court's 4-3 decision to deny the League's petition to force justices to recuse themselves from cases involving major campaign contributors. To read the article, click here.

Citing rising spending on judicial elections and a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling, two national legal affairs groups—Justice at Stake and the Brennan Center for Justice—today urged the Michigan Supreme Court to strengthen the state’s rules governing when judges must step aside in cases involving campaign supporters.

Special interest groups so far haven't aired independent ads in the fall state Supreme Court races, according to "Buying Time 2008," the Brennan Center for Justice's weekly television advertising report. By the same time in 2006, the report said, outside groups had spent $1 million on ads in the Alabama state Supreme Court race.

Civic groups in five Great Lakes states are calling on more than 700 judicial candidates to follow new campaign conduct guidelines that help them steer clear of special interest pressures and political agendas.

A nine-page memo, mailed to candidates in Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin, warns of the dangers posed by rising campaign costs, angry and misleading television ads, and growing ethical quandaries over what to say on the campaign trail about cases that might land in court.

Today, the Justice at Stake Campaign is kicking off a new weekly national round-up, "This Week in Judicial Politics." From now until the 2008 election, it will be published every Friday on Justice at Stake’s web site, www.justiceatstake.org, and in the group’s blog, www.gavelgrab.org. 

NEW YORK – As the fall 2008 judicial season kicks off, early data on TV advertising do not yet offer clear trends as to how much and where judicial campaigns will suffer from excessive special interest and partisan pressure. But an analysis of races earlier this year shows that interest group targeting and big money court-campaigns remain deeply entrenched.

"There is an insightful editorial in the Tennessean urging Tennessee to maintain its Merit Selection system. Buck Lewis, who’s seen the Tennessee Merit Selection system from the perspective of a nominating commission member and a disappointed judicial candidate, wants the people of Tennessee to know that the system works." Click here to read more.

A national watchdog group dedicated to fair and impartial courts praised a proposal by the American Bar Association to reduce partisanship in the process for appointing federal judges.

The plan, approved unanimously Monday by the ABA House of Delegates, urges senators in each state to form bipartisan commissions to review and suggest the most professionally qualified candidates for openings in the federal courts. The ABA resolution also urged future presidents to consult closely with a state’s leaders before nominating new judges.