judgesonmerit.org

In the wake of Caperton, an editorial in the San Antonio Express-News urges Texas to adopt Merit Selection for its judges.  Leading the charge for reform in Texas is the current Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court, Wallace Jefferson.  His support for Merit Selection continues a tradition begun by his predecessors on the bench; he is “the third successive Texas Supreme Court chief justice to advocate reforming the state’s judicial selection process.”

Jefferson had warned of the danger posed by money-packed judicial elections even before the Caperton decision came down, telling the state legislature earlier this year: “If the public believes that judges are biased toward contributors, then confidence in the courts will suffer.”  The Express-News‘ editorial board concurs:

The judiciary system depends on an even playing field to maintain fairness.  And the influence of money and partisanship must be reduced to deliver the even playing field that Texans deserve.

That’s something everyone deserves — including Pennsylvanians.  The way to achieve that even playing field is by getting judges out of the fundraising business. The way to do that is to adopt Merit Selection.

Texas is looking at this year’s election results — where 22 of 26 Republican incumbent judges were voted off the bench — and remembering 1994, when all but one democratic incumbent judge were ousted.  The Houston Chronicle reports that while some folks are gearing up for the next round of elections, others are renewing their calls for changing how judges are selected.

Just listen to what current Texas Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson is saying:

This is a strange way to select those who guard our legal rights. . . . It is time to decide whether partisan election is the best means to ensure judicial competence.

Jefferson is joined by former Texas Chief Justice Tom Phillips who long has supported implementing a Merit Selection system for Texas.  According to Phillips, making elections nonpartisan will not solve the problems inherent in judicial electiosn, “including the involvement of special-interest groups, the need to raise money and curry votes, and the lack of voter knowledge of judicial candidates.”

We share the concerns of these Texas leaders and wish them luck.  We recognize that the problems inherent in partisan judicial elections are getting worse, not better, and we hope that Pennsylvania will have the opportunity to choose Merit Selection as a better way to select appellate judges.