Selection Snapshots is a monthly newsletter published by the Quality Judges Initiative of IAALS, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System. It provides an overview of judicial selection-related developments across the country. We hope you will enjoy it and will share it with others who might be interested. You can access past entries and issues of the newsletter here.

Arizona

All 18 superior court judges up for retention in Pima County, as well as the three appellate judges on the ballot, were found to meet performance standards by the commission on judicial performance. Most judges scored higher than 85 percent in all categories. Judges in Pima and Maricopa counties, along with appellate judges, must stand for periodic retention by voters. The commission uses surveys of various respondent groups—including attorneys, jurors, and litigants—to assess judges’ performance on the bench.

This month Governor Brewer will make her third appointment to the five-member supreme court. Thirty-five of the 38 judges she has appointed since taking office in 2009 have been Republicans. While 92 percent of Brewer’s judicial appointments have been from her own party, the rates for her predecessors were 75, 66, and 80 percent.

Delaware

The legislature’s creation of two additional judgeships and several retirements are creating a record number of superior court vacancies to be filled. If Governor Markell is reelected in November, he will have a rare opportunity to shape the superior court. (The governor appoints judges from the recommendations of an executive order-based judicial nominating commission. Appointments must be confirmed by the senate.)

Florida

The executive board of the state Republican Party voted to oppose the retention of the three supreme court justices on the ballot in November. At the same time, the justices have the support of some prominent Republicans and conservatives.

The conservative advocacy group Americans for Prosperity launched a campaign to highlight the records of the three justices standing for retention. The campaign includes television ads criticizing a supreme court ruling that kept an Affordable Care Act-related measure off the 2010 ballot. According to the president of the state AFP chapter, the group is not advocating for the retention or defeat of the justices but rather calling attention to their “advocating from the bench.”

Indiana

From three finalists named by the judicial nominating commission, Governor Daniels appointed county court judge Loretta Rush to the supreme court. This appointment leaves only two states (Idaho and Iowa) without a woman on the highest court. Rush will be the second woman to serve on Indiana’s supreme court.

Iowa

According to a statewide poll, 47 percent of voters favor retaining the four justices standing for retention in November, while 24 percent oppose their retention and 25 percent are undecided. Poll results also show little residual anger over the supreme court’s 2009 decision recognizing a right to same-sex marriage, which resulted in the retention defeat of three justices in 2010. Forty-one percent of voters view the court favorably, while only 18 percent have an unfavorable opinion. A strong majority of voters also believes that the court should be insulated from political pressure as it interprets the constitution.

The founders of Justice Not Politics, a 501(c)(4) organization formed to defend three justices against retention challenges in 2010, have established a 527 organization called Justice Not Politics Action to support Justice David Wiggins’ retention. As a 501(c)(4), Justice Not Politics can only engage in education and outreach, but as a 527, Justice Not Politics Action can encourage voters to vote “Yes” on Wiggins.

Iowans for Freedom organized a statewide “NO Wiggins” bus tour to oppose judicial activism and Justice Wiggins’ retention. Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum and Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal made appearances at events along the way. As part of its effort to support the state’s judicial merit selection and retention process, the state bar launched its own weeklong bus tour—the “Yes Iowa Justice Tour.”

Kansas

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed a lower court decision that rejected a constitutional challenge to the state’s merit selection system. Opponents of the process had argued that having five lawyers on the nine-member supreme court nominating commission, who are not popularly elected or appointed by an elected official, violates the Equal Protection Clause’s “one person, one vote” requirement.

Louisiana

In the dispute over who should replace Kitty Kimball as chief justice when she steps down in early 2013, a federal district court judge ruled that Justice Bernice Johnson’s service from 1994 to 2000 as part of a civil rights case settlement should count toward her seniority. Attorneys for the state had argued that the issue should be decided by the state supreme court, and they have appealed the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Maryland

Over the last year, the percentage of women serving on the state’s courts has risen from 36.1 percent to 38.2 percent. Governor Malloy has contributed to this uptick, selecting women for 46 of 102 judicial vacancies since taking office in 2007. Nationwide, women hold 27.5 percent of state court judgeships.

Massachusetts

Some senators are pushing to abolish the governor’s council, one of the chief responsibilities of which is to confirm judicial appointments. The council has come under fire recently for “unorthodox questioning” of judicial nominees and “inflammatory behavior” of some members. (The eight members of the constitutionally authorized body are elected by the public.)

Michigan

At its fall convention, the state Democratic Party nominated three women to run for supreme court seats in November. Two of the three candidates are challenging incumbent justices, while the third is running for an open seat.

Mississippi

Though the state’s judicial elections are nonpartisan in the sense that party affiliation does not appear on the ballot, the state Democratic Party endorsed a state representative who is challenging the sitting chief justice. The state Republican Party announced endorsements of three supreme court candidates in August.

Missouri

A circuit court judge rejected a challenge to the ballot summary for a proposed constitutional amendment that would allow the governor to name an additional member of the commission that nominates potential appellate judges and increase the required number of nominees from three to four. Proponents of the proposal argued that the secretary of state’s summary is “inaccurate and unfair.” A three-judge panel of the court of appeals for the western district upheld the circuit court decision.

Montana

In a 2-1 ruling, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit blocked a state law barring political party endorsements of judicial candidates. While holding that the state has “a compelling interest in maintaining a fair and independent judiciary,” the majority found that the state need not restrict speech to accomplish this. The two candidates for an open supreme court seat in November said they will not accept party endorsements because the code of judicial conduct forbids it.

Nebraska

A group known as The Do Good Dads Against Unjust Judges is challenging the retention of three local judges. The group takes issue with the judges’ rulings in cases involving child custody, adoptions, and child abuse, among others. The group is also pursuing legislative changes and better training for attorneys who handle custody cases. A recent state bar poll showed that 87 percent of attorneys favor retaining the three judges.

New Jersey

With two vacancies on the supreme court, Chief Justice Rabner is assigning two intermediate appellate court judges to the supreme court as of October 1. The court has been operating with six members since Justice Long retired in March, and a lower court judge who has been serving temporarily reaches mandatory retirement age next month. (Both of Governor Christie’s nominees to fill these vacancies were rejected by the senate.)

North Carolina

The only supreme court election on the ballot in November will determine whether the 4-3 balance on the court favors liberals or conservatives. The outcome of the race could have its greatest impact in a redistricting case that is moving through the lower courts.

Oklahoma

A group known as the Oklahoma Civil Justice Council released ratings of supreme court justices based on how they have ruled in civil liability cases. The group is backed by the State Chamber, whose president says that the ratings are intended as an educational tool for voters rather than as an effort to intimidate the justices or endorse particular candidates. Four justices are standing for retention in November.

Pennsylvania

A Philadelphia-based Tea Party group vowed to challenge the retention of two supreme court justices on the ballot in 2013 if the state’s voter ID law is not in place for the November elections. The justices joined a 4-2 majority that sent a case challenging the law back to the commonwealth court.

Tennessee

Three former judges recused themselves from hearing a challenge to the state’s appellate judge selection process, citing the need to preserve the integrity of the special five-member panel appointed by Governor Haslam to decide the case. The three also noted their membership in Tennesseeans for Fair and Impartial Courts, an organization dedicated to preserving the existing process for choosing appellate judges (merit selection).

Utah

The judicial performance evaluation commission published its evaluation reports and recommendations online. All judges standing for retention in November received positive recommendations. Evaluation information includes attorney, court employee, and juror ratings, in addition to ratings given by volunteer courtroom observers who work with the commission.

Washington

An analysis of voting in a supreme court primary election suggests “deep racial polarization.” In the contest between incumbent justice Steve Gonzalez and a challenger who neither raised money nor campaigned, the challenger won 30 of 39 counties and nearly 40 percent of the statewide vote. In one county, the gap between Latino and non-Latino support for Gonzalez was 43 points.

West Virginia

In a unanimous ruling, the supreme court of appeals declared unconstitutional the matching or “rescue” funds provision of the state’s pilot public financing program. In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the matching funds provision of Arizona’s public financing program for legislative and executive campaigns. Attorneys for Allen Loughry—the only one of four high court candidates to participate in the program—had argued that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision did not extend to public financing of judicial campaigns and that judicial elections are different because of the state’s strong interest in ensuring that courts are fair and free of bias. Members of the state elections commission voted unanimously not to appeal the decision.

Federal

By an 89-1 vote, the U.S. Senate confirmed Stephanie Rose as a judge in the Southern District of Iowa. To date, President Obama has appointed 72 women to the federal bench, which is the most ever appointed by a president in a single term.

Prior to a campaign recess, the U.S. Senate confirmed two of the 17 pending nominees for federal district court vacancies. Fourteen of the 17 nominees received unanimous approval from the senate judiciary committee. Vacancies in the federal judiciary will soon approach ten percent.