We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
It's Not Who Hires You but Who Can Fire You: The Case Against Retention Elections.
- Authors
AULET, KENNETH J.
- Abstract
Since Republican Party of Minnesota v. White was decided by the Supreme Court, "merit selection" plans have been the favored method for judicial election reform over non-partisan elections. This Note will offer a survey of the reform methods and examine their flaws -- specifically, the assumption that retention elections are less of a threat to judicial impartiality than elections to fill vacancies. This Note proposes that states that wish to retain some public control over the judiciary should abolish retention elections, while preserving elections to fill judicial vacancies. The theory that the method of judicial selection is more important than judicial retention methods in maintaining an impartial and qualified judiciary is not supported by evidence and should be discarded.
- Subjects
NONPARTISAN elections; REPUBLICAN Party of Minnesota v. White (Supreme Court case); JUDICIAL selection &; appointment; ELECTIONS; JOB vacancies; COURTS; EVIDENCE; LAW reform
- Publication
Columbia Journal of Law & Social Problems, 2011, Vol 44, Issue 4, p589
- ISSN
0010-1923
- Publication type
Article