Aug 18 2008
Why One Kansas Voter Prefers Merit Selection
Cristina Janney, the news director of the Newton Kansan, has written a column about the upcoming judicial elections and retention elections. Some Kansas counties use elections and some use Merit Selection to pick their judges. Janney explains why she would choose Merit Selection:
I have lived in counties that have used both processes, and I believe I prefer merit selection with votes to retain. I think the judicial system is the best off when there is the least amount of political pressure exerted on the system. Justice should be about the law, experience and competence not a popularity contest.
We couldn’t have said it better.
Janney’s column is filled with more good advice about how voters can educate themselves about judicial candidates and judges standing for retention. And she sums up simply why voters should care about who becomes a judge:
[T]his is important. These judges hold the reins of our judicial system. They preside of [sic] over criminal cases of the most heinous of criminals, million-dollar lawsuits and hold people’s lives in their hands.
Janney’s words should resonate with voters everywhere. Thoughtful, knowledgeable, responsible and (above all) fair and impartial judges are critical to the functioning of our legal system.
Choosing appellate judges shouldn’t be a contest of political clout and campaign fundraising. Merit Selection puts the focus back on the ability and qualifications of judicial candidates. We hope that, as they learn more about Merit Selection, the voters of Pennsylvania will agree that it’s a better way to choose our appellate judges.
Tags: Cristina Janney, judicial elections, Kansas, Merit Selection, Newton Kansan, Opinion
