Partisan Elections For Judges Essay

Partisan Elections for Judges

Being a primarily Republican state, most Texas judges are also republicans. This is because judges in Texas are elected and voted upon by the public, not appointed. Most judges are initially appointed. The governor fills in vacancies in the judiciary with confirmation of the Senate. These appointees are then reelected, most often, with no opposition. Judges are removed only by failure to be reelected, by the Supreme Court due to incompetence, official misconduct, or negligence, or by impeachment by the House.

The Texas judicial system is complicated and confusing. Many Americans don’t understand the US Supreme Court, how then will they understand the smaller, state and local judicial system. A voter in Texas is asked to vote for many different candidates running from anything from

A former chief justice from the Texas Supreme Court, Tom Phillips, said, “of the ways you can elect judges, Texas has one of the worst systems.” (Philips) Many people vote for the name or party that they recognize. Meaning that the better known the candidates name is, the more likely they will be voted for. Therefore the more money that is put into candidacy representation, the greater the chance that candidate will be elected. Between 1992 and 1997, “the seven winning candidates for the Texas Supreme Court raised nearly $9.2 million dollars.” (Judicial Campaigns) And out of that $9.2 million, more than 40% was contributed by parties or lawyers with cases before the court or by contributors linked to those parties.” (Judicial Campaigns) Money was donated to a judge’s candidacy, the judge got elected, and then the same companies or person that donated would show up in court with that judge. The judge would then almost always decide in favor of whoever donated to his candidacy. The Judicial Campaign Fairness Act was enacted in 1995, due to the immense amounts of money and scandals surrounding the Texas Supreme Courts