Why is state judicial selection historically controversial?
Ongoing political struggles within states over “who” will choose our judges lie at the heart of American’s judicial selection controversy. The introductory chapter of Anthony Champagne and Judith Haydel, eds., Judicial Reform in the States (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1993) provides a comprehensive yet concise historical overview of American judicial selection. The initial controversy in the United States began over a single point of contention at the federal level—which branch of federal government (the executive or legislative) would be responsible for appointing judges? Despite resentment over King George III’s control over judicial selection, our founders believed judges should be appointed rather than elected. A compromise was negotiated that called for “the president to appoint judges with the advice and consent of the Senate.” Even so, the state-level controversy over legislative or gubernatorial appointment continued. Controversy has characterized each succeeding j
