Advertisement

Ware

Follow

Comment history

Opinion: State's judge selection undemocratic

Actually, Orwell, there are many cases in which appellate courts make law in non-Constitutional cases; you can see the examples I cite. And as to the constitutional cases in which you concede that appellate judges make law, most everyone, as Harvard Law Prof Jack Goldsmith writes, "recognize[s] that the constitutional opinions of Supreme Court Justices are affected by their political proclivities.” You can see more support for this consensus view at p.12 of http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf...
We do need independent judges and the current Kansas system is weaker on that front than the "federal model" I advocate. See pp.421-24 of http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf...

December 5, 2012 at 2:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Opinion: State's judge selection undemocratic

Good question, Alyosha, as that can be a complex topic. My thoughts on it are here http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf... Once you see those examples, I hope you'll agree there are plenty of cases in which appellate judges are making law.

November 30, 2012 at 5:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Process is fine

observant, after reading this, do you still deny that appellate judges make law?
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf...

November 30, 2012 at 5:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Process is fine

Thanks for asking, Alyosha. Plenty of examples here
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf...
Do they persuade you?

November 30, 2012 at 5:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Opinion: State's judge selection undemocratic

adastraperapathy, do you agree that state supreme court justices make law? Or do you think they merely apply law made by others?

November 30, 2012 at 8:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Process is fine

This is Stephen Ware. Patrick Nichols, do you agree that state supreme court justices make law? Or do you think they merely apply law made by others?

November 30, 2012 at 8:47 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Opinion: State's judge selection undemocratic

This is Stephen Ware. I understand that some people use anonymous comments just to blow off steam, while I appreciate the input of those who make careful arguments and ask thoughtful questions.

Like lawslady and overplayedhistory, I have concerns about judicial elections. But electing judges and appointing them in a way that violates democratic equality are not the only options. A dozen states appoint (not elect) their supreme courts in systems significantly more open and democratic than the Kansas system. This is the model advocated in the last paragraph of my column above and more thoroughly here:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf...

“Orwell” largely copies the talking points used by the Bar's leaders to defend their privileged role in selecting these important lawmakers. Note that Orwell can’t and doesn’t deny that appellate judges are very important lawmakers or that a Kansas lawyer has far more power than a non-lawyer in their selection. Orwell argues that this violation of democratic equality in the initial selection of judges is okay because sitting judges in Kansas are later subject to “elections” in which they face no opponents. A response to this argument is at pp.421-24 of the article linked above.

November 29, 2012 at 2:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Do you think KU should raise admission standards?

Good points.

November 29, 2012 at 11:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Next