Introduction
When it comes to the selection of judges, there has been a lot of conjecture and discussions on the issue for the longest number of years in this country as well as in this state, Maryland. For instance, the outstanding appointment of Judge Sonia Sotomayor was a culminating point that was able to heighten the people’s awareness of the importance of diversity in our highest court. The Maryland Declaration of Rights has been able to come with a description of the process of judicial selection and it is found as well in Maryland statutory law. Generally speaking, judges in Maryland’s lower courts are appointed while the judges in Circuit Courts must run for election. A third process is used in the case of appellate judges in Maryland.
At one time the election process was thought to allow for a more diverse bench by providing opportunities for minority candidates to run for office. The court system in Maryland has been known to be compromised of four major levels; there are two courts for trial with the other two major appellate courts (Reddick 29). The courts for trial do give consideration of presented evidence towards making judgments which have to be based on facts and laws. On the other hand, the appellate courts do come up with a review of the actions of the trial courts and their decisions to see if the laws and legalities were followed. This means that the selection of the responsible judges is something important. Therefore, this paper will examine the process of judicial selection in Maryland and how such a process will impact the diversity of the bench, and also suggest better approaches that can be adopted in the state.
The Process of Judicial Selection in Maryland
Maryland’s Declaration of Rights and State Law have been important tools that have been able to give a thorough analysis of the processes for judicial selection in the state. This has been the same practice in all other states in the United States as well. From the years of 1970s, the Maryland state has been adopting a judicial process through which nomination is done. This sees several lawyers being nominated for the jobs. Such lawyers who have already been nominated by the nominating committee have to effectively meet the required standards in terms of their legal understanding and aptitude (Reddick 38). These individuals have to be highly distinguished personnel and in possession of a great deal of integrity, a sound understanding of legal proceedings, and wisdom. On the other hand, those vying for the Circuit Court Judges’ positions have to run in an election so that they may be retained upon appointment, and their term runs for fifteen years.
As with the Maryland Constitution, there has to be the Governor who is supposed to effectively fill the new judgeship. This has to be the same case with any vacancy within the judicial office. The individual who is to be appointed has to be having some key and important qualifications (Anderson 26). However, the Governor still is greatly limited when it comes to the guidance and in making the decisions for the judicial appointments. Mandel Marvin who is a governor in charge of issuing executive orders created commissions for judicial nominations. These commissions would help in the year the 1970s when judicial selections were carried out and the process is still taking place today. The state governors have since that date adopted the same orders in the executive office.
There is also the Judicial Nominating Commissions whose role is in screening the candidates for all the judicial offices, from the district, circuit, and appellate courts. Such a method of screening has always been known to be effective in appointing highly effective and qualified individuals for the job. In brief, all the judges in the state are usually chosen through the application of merit process which entails the use of nominating commissions, and this is for terms of one year (Reddick 41). The judges who are known as appellate are supposed to serve for ten years after their election into office. The judges of the Circuit Court will be selected by use of a non-partisan form of elections.
Effectiveness of the Selection Process for the State
From the above kind of selection, it will be noted that several elements and issues should be addressed. To begin with, the process of electing the judges for the District and Circuit Judges has been done and monitored by the Nominating Commissions. It is necessary to note that such a process is quite effective because it ensures that all the vetted individuals for the job have been able to meet the necessary know-how and legal aptitude which makes them qualified for the job. Without this knowledge, one is believed not to be competent enough for the job (Politics 34). This leads to an election in which the qualified individuals for the job have to be subjected to another scrutiny in ensuring that the best wins to give services to the district or circuit. Almost all the districts and areas have been able to conduct fair elections thus being able to have responsible judges who end up performing better for the organization. In that case, it should be agreed that the election process has been able to give the desired results since the years of 1970s when the first executive order was issued (Politics 36).
The other process involved in the selection process involves the appointment of the appellate judges. After that, every year they undergo an election process for ten years. This has been able to ensure that the best judges have been given the job. However, with all the processes being done in this state, there have been strong indications that the state has not been interviewing and evaluating all its judges who are standing to be retained. The only evaluation done is on the judges who have shown interest for the very first time and hence this has been the major setback with this kind of appointment process. Generally, while there are some weaknesses with this form of a selection of judges in the state, the majority of such processes have been able to come up with a great deal of desired results and also being able to produce a diverse bench by employing specific requirements whenever evaluating the newcomers into the practice and intentions in the practice (Politics 41).
Pros and Cons with Maryland’s Selection Process for Judges
With the Maryland processes of election for judges for the district, circuit, and appellate, it should be noted that there is a lot of positive issues. For instance, the sharp vetting and scrutinizing process have been quite significant in ensuring that the best results are realized in the judicial system. This kind of approach has thus been making it possible to have individuals who are knowledgeable and have an understanding, being short-listed for the elections. Going farther ahead, the use of elections has also been ensuring that a diverse bench is arrived at thus making the judicial system for the state quite effective (Taha 40). When it comes to the selection and appointment of the appellate judges, similar procedures have been adopted which have been effective in ensuring that the state’s judicial system does not become flawed.
On the contrary, there are as well several issues that have to be addressed due to the fact that they have been giving some setbacks within the system. To begin with, the election process might come up with a number of ethical issues like insincerity which might see the wrong judges or unsuitable individuals being given the job. While selecting the specific individuals to go for elections, chances of having some individuals being given a competitive advantage by the nominating committees are quite high, as it had been reported in a number of districts in the state. On the other hand, the judges for the appellate courts when going for retention elections do not have their performances being evaluated and hence this has been of the major weaknesses of the state’s appointment process (Politics 42). The ethical scrutiny is that, with the long years of serving the people, say ten years for the appellate judges and fifteen for the district and circuit judges, chances of developing a culture of impunity arises and failure of delivering the best just for all might be a common occurrence. This hence calls for measures towards addressing the same.
At other times, the kind of selection has also been known to be flawed hence making the selection process unethical and being unable to give the best individuals for the practice. Such a happening has been seeing a lot of individuals quite concerned. While there is a number of positive approaches and performances with this kind of selection process, the negative aspects and long periods of service by a single individual might make the process more unjustifiable and hence the reason why possible changes are necessary (Taha 40). The bottom line is, while the system has been necessary and applicable, it is necessary that newer ways of selection modalities can be applied to make all lawyers and individuals nominated more effective in the job. Another important issue has been on the single fact that different individuals tend to be retained in the electoral and appointment committees, and hence it should be necessary to have such issues addressed in a better way (Taha 40).
Possible Measures
From this kind of research and study, it has to be noted that the rightful approach of this judicial selection process is when the necessary address of the raised issues is done. For instance, the Maryland procedure is capable of bringing a greater diversity in the high most judges towards the better provision of justice to the people of the state (Anderson 24). This has been the case with a state like Illinois which was able to come up with successful amendments in ensuring that the recruitment and selection of judges would be done in an appropriate manner and with proper nomination procedures. Also, despite the level of the judiciary, be it the district level or the appellate level, it is necessary to have an election process and evaluation of all willing contesters, whether new or being retained, in order to produce a great diversity. States that have been able to do so have been able to achieve better performance. The major changes that can be suggested towards having a complete change of this system are by having elections for all the levels of judges and as well applying the evaluation process for all individuals interested in the practice so as to have the best form of practice ever (Taha 42).
Conclusion
The major changes that can be suggested towards having a complete change of this system are by having elections for all the levels of judges and as well applying the evaluation process for all individuals interested in the practice so as to have the best form of practice. It is necessary, therefore, to have keener considerations on the areas that might have been causing problems with the selection process to be addressed keenly as noted in the study (Anderson 26). This will make it more possible to effectively have a stable system of the judicial selection system. What has to be known is that the better performance of the judicial system of the state is what serves the people of the state in the best manner. This has to be the ultimate kind of interest.
Works Cited
Anderson, S. “Diversity and the Judicial Merit Selection Process.” Journal of American Law. 12(3): 21-43.
Taha, Amhed E. ‘Information and the selection of judges: a comment on ‘a tournament on judges.’’ Journal of Law. 3(2): 35-43.
Politics, J. ‘Judicial politics and the politics of selecting judges.’ Journal of Global Politics, 7(2): 12-43.
Reddick, Malia. ‘Merit Selection: a review of the social scientific Literature.’ Journal of Societal Law. 14(2): 23-56.