Should judges be elected or appointed?

Should judges be elected or appointed? Election provides too much opportunity for influence and conflicts of interest. Actually I approved the Missouri system where out state judges are elected Appointments are political anyways. I have been appointed to one seat and elected to another seat. Elections, even though highly charged politically, are less political than an appointment. with an appointment, there are "behind the scenes" influences. Elections are largely in the open and not subject to deal making. judges Should be independent and Should not have to run for election. We have a code of ethics and are limited by what we can and can't say. We can't make promises and can't prejudge a case, often what those seeking political office do. Additionally, who are we most likely to raise money from? The lawyers who appear before us. Not a good practice. Running for election takes time away from doing what we are being paid to do - be fair and impartial judges , rule on cases in a timely manner, and not be swayed by public opinion - in essence be an independent judiciary.

judicial service. The ethics rules in states that have elected judges need to be re written to accommodate the reality on the ground in a workable model that recognizes the dual role of elected judges, that of public elected servant and judicial officer, The terms should be a minimum of 6 years. Accountability and transparency matter

Loading..

Tags:

  Judicial

Information

Related search queries