ABA Goes Forward with Judicial "Selection" Plan

The Alabama Bar Association wants to end the election of appellate court judges in Alabama, saying that selection by a judicial nominating commission would be less political.

The first step in the ABA's proposal is to form a nine-member judicial nominating commission, including lawyers, non-lawyers and one judge, to develop a list of three nominees to give to the governor.

The governor would then pick from list; his choice would be final because the plan does not call for legislative confirmation.

When the judges appointed by the governor completed their terms, an 11-member evaluation commission constructed roughly like the nominating commission would assess their work and make reports available to the public.

Sitting judges would then stand for an uncontested retention election, in which voters would decide whether they wanted the judge to continue serving. (Mobile Register)

Anyone who thinks that appointment by committee will be "less political" than election by the people is kidding himself. You can rest assured that the AEA, the Trial Lawyers Association, the Business Council of Alabama, the Alabama Farmer's Federation, and other powerful interest groups will be guaranteed seats at the nominating table.

The ABA's plan would also undermine checks and balances between the branches of state government by leaving the legislature out of the confirmation process entirely. Thus, judges would be appointed without proper accountability to the people, whether directly by popular election or indirectly through the consent of elected representatives.

How this would improve on the current system is beyond me.

I'm not saying that popular elections are necessarily the most desirable way of selecting judges. There are plenty of good arguments in favor of appointment. But, appointment by committee is one method that was specifically rejected by the framers of the U.S. Constitution, and it should be rejected as an amendment to the Alabama Constitution.