THE EVOLUTION OF APPROACHES TO THE JUDICIAL CORPS  FORMATION IN THE US (FROM THE IDEAS OF ALBERT M. KALES  TO THE PLAN OF SANDRA D. O'CONNOR)

Oleksandr Kulikov; Oleksii Kulikov

doi:10.23856/5522

Oleksandr Kulikov Academy of Advocacy of Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9856-4431
Oleksii Kulikov Kyiv State University of Trade and Economics https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5400-4133

Keywords: selection of judges in the US, gubernatorial appointments of judges, partisan elections of judges, non-partisan elections of judges, Missouri Plan, O'Connor Plan, appointment of judges by the legislature

Abstract

The topic of the article is devoted to the selection of judges in the United States of America, a country that is a good example of the variety of approaches that can be used to form an effective judicial corps. This topic is relevant not only for the US, where even in a relatively recent historical retrospect, individual states tried to choose new models for the selection of judges, but also for other democratic countries, which are currently faced with the issue of building a new or reorganizing the existing format of judicial power on the basis of professionalism, integrity and responsibility to society. The article touches on certain historical moments of the evolution of approaches to the selection of judges in the US. In particular, the path of the development of procedures for the selection of judges is analyzed, which started from the dominant at the beginning of the creation of this state, the gubernatorial appointments of judges to the progressive methods proposed at the beginning of the 20th century by Albert Kales and already in the new millennium by Sandra Day O'Connor, which combined the procedures of individual appointments, popular votes and professional selection by independent bodies. In addition, the article provides a brief author's analysis of the main advantages and disadvantages of the existing methods of selecting judges in the US.

References

1. William Е. Raftery. (2019). States Continue to Experiment with Partisan Judicial Elections. Judicature. Spring 2019. Volume 103 Number 1. Retrieved from: https://judicature.duke.edu/
articles/states-continue-to-experiment-with-partisan-judicial-elections/
2. William Е. Raftery. (2016). Trends in judicial selection methods published by the bolch judicial institute at Duke law. Duke University School of Law. All rights reserved. Judicature.
duke.edu. Vol. 100, No. 1.
3. Ray M. Harding. The Case for Partisan Election of Judges. American Bar Association Journal. Vol. 55, No. 12 (December, 1969), pp. 1162–1164 (3 pages). Published By: American Bar Association. Retrieved from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25724988
4. The Federal Judicial Nominations Process. Retrieved from: https://www.acslaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/The-Federal-Judicial-Nominations-Process-1.pdf
5. Gubernatorial appointment of judges. Retrieved from: https://ballotpedia.org/Gubernatorial_appointment_of_judges
6. Brandice Canes-Wrone, Tom S. Clark. Judicial independence and nonpartisan elections. Wisconsin law review. Retrieved from: https://biblioteca.cejamericas. org/bitstream/handle/2015/2258/judicial-independence-and-nonpartisan-elections.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
7. Larry C. Berkson, Judicial Selection in the United States: A Special Report, 64 JUDICATURE 176, 176 (1980) (documenting the various procedures across the states in the postcolonial era).
Retrieved from: https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/judicial-selection-unitedstates-special-report
8. Billy Corriher. Partisan Judicial Elections and the Distorting Influence of Campaign Cash. Center for American Progress. OCT 25, 2012. Retrieved from: https://www.americanprogress.
org/article/partisan-judicial-elections-and-the-distorting-influence-of-campaign-cash/
9. ChrisW. Bonneau. (2018). The Case for Partisan Judicial Elections. The Federalist Society. Retrieved from:https://fedsoc-cms public.s3.amazonaws.com/update/pdf/o8VChonmzhbztS9cPcXH78MFaAoH3mEzyk1sZS8k.pdf
10. Judicial selection in the states. Retrieved from: https://ballotpedia.org/Judicial_selection_in_the_states
11. Nonpartisan election of judges. Retrieved from: https://ballotpedia.org/Nonpartisan_election_of_judges
12. Sandra S. Newman & Daniel M. Isaacs, Historical Overview of the Judicial Selection Process in the United States: Is the Electoral System in Pennsylvania Unjustified, 49 Vill. L. Rev. 1 (2004). Retrieved from: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr/vol49/iss1/1
13. A.M. Kales. (1914). Unpopular government in the United States. University of Chicago press. P. 263.
14. Assisted appointment (Hybrid). Retrieved from: https://ballotpedia.org//Assisted_appointment_(Hybrid)
15. Judicial selection. Retrieved from: https://yourmissourijudges.org/the-missouri-plan/judicial-selection/
16. Selection of Judges. Arizona Judicial Branch. Retrieved from: https://www.azcourts.gov/guidetoazcourts/Selection-of-Judges
17. D.Keith, L.Robbins. (2017, september). Legislative Appointments for Judges: Lessons from South Carolina, Virginia, and Rhode Island. Brennan center for justice.
18. Legislative election of judges. Retrieved from: https://ballotpedia.org/Legislative_election_of_judges
19. Abigail Perkiss. (2022) A look back at Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s court legacy. July 1, 2022. Retrieved from: https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/a-look-back-at-justice-sandra-dayoconnors-court-legacy
20. IAALS. (2014). The O'Konnor judicial selection plan. 20 p. Retrieved from: https://iaals.du.edu/projects/o-connor-judicial-selection-plan