Judicial Selection Process

In the U.S. judicial system, a defendant found guilty in a trial court can normally appeal to a higher federal court. These federal courts, or appellate courts, review decisions made by trial courts (Neubauer, 2010). Appellate courts can be on the federal and state level, but do not hold trials or hear new evidence. These courts consist of a judge, or a lawyer, or a group of either one, who read the transcript of the trial and whether the previous decision correctly or incorrectly followed the law (Neubauer, 2010). Similar to trial courts, the federal government and most states have made two different types of appellate courts: intermediate, which hear all cases, and supreme courts, which can pick and choose the cases heard (Neubauer, 2010). Even though there are many different types of courts within the judicial system of the United States, the role of the judge stays constant throughout the majority of branches.

In Nevada, in contrast, the State Supreme Court uses a “staggered” system in order to appoint their judges. The judges are selected not by presidential appointment but by “qualified electors of the State at the general election,” and are only allowed to hold their office for a limited period of years. Furthermore, the Chief Justice is only allowed to maintain their post for six years, thus reducing the opportunity to shape the direction of the state’s laws throughout the remainder of their lives.

Judicial power is given to the Supreme Court. All nine federal judges are appointed by the President and serve "during good behavior," usually meaning for life. The judges cannot be removed from office except for criminal behavior or malfeasance. This makes them less vulnerable to political pressure and outside influence. The main feature of the independent role for the courts lies in their power to interpret the Constitution. They review the "constitutionality" of laws and executive orders. There are

State court judges are selected in a variety of ways, including being selected by the governor of that State in which they reside or by the state legislature. In some cases, judges are able to run for election if they want to be a judge.

Selection of judicial personnel differ amongst states in the united States, as all the states have their unique criterion of selection governing how they fill their state and local judiciaries. The five main methods are: Partisan elections, Nonpartisan elections, Legislative elections, gubernatorial appointment, and assisted appointment.

In Texas, the Judicial system is made of up judges whose jurisdiction ranges from municipal, county, probate, district, and justice of the peace courts, each of which undergoes an election process, one which is the same for each judge, expect for the municipal. An advocate for another system, Wallace Jefferson, firmly believes that an appointment system should take place for all judges to assure that those who are put into a position are done so based off of merit and qualification. However, given the current system, judges, per say those who wish to serve on a district court, must adhere to these requirements. Judges must be a U.S. citizen, a resident of Texas, have been practicing law as a lawyer or state judge for at least four years, be between the ages of 25 and 75 and be a resident of their respective judicial district for two years, minimum.

“In 1926 California joined a nationwide court reform movement that encouraged the establishment of judicial councils to bring coherence to court operations and procedures and improve the quality of justice.” (Profile/Judicial Council of California/Administrative Office of the Courts, n.d.) In 1960, a constitutional amendment created the Administrative Director of the Courts and within a year the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) was born (Profile/Judicial Council of California/Administrative Office of the Courts, n.d.) The purpose of the AOC was aimed at providing (1) “professional services to the courts and council (2) establish an “array of programs to improve justice administration” and (3) “enhance court technology, judicial branch education and human resources support”. Today, those ideals are very much ingrained within the California’s Judicial Council.

After only two years as county judge, Truman became presiding judge, which he continued for the next eight years of his life.

Each state within the United States of America (USA) has its own unique judicial selection process within its court system. The judicial processes vary from court to court depending on a particular state. This paper analyses these processes, the qualifications for selecting the judges and the steps for removing judges from office, as it applies in the USA states of New York and Texas.

Once the chosen candidate makes it to office it is very crucial on them to uphold or give the citizens what is needed or asked upon in change. During the

When a judge is selected through executive appointment, the governor or legislature from the state they are in will choose them from a large selection of possible candidate. Traditionally, this process gives all of the power to appoint a judge solely to the governor. This process is the least effective of all three. There are zero states who still solely practice this method traditionally and there is a good reason for that. Essentially, the governor of a state can purely pick any eligible candidate. A governor could appoint someone that would help them further their political agenda. This is not a reasonable way to select a good candidate. There has to be regulations and systems in place that choose the most qualified candidate. Many states utilize executive appointment but have added methods to keep the governor in check. For example, in New Jersey a governor can

Judicial elections, a process virtually unheard of in any other modern-day democracy, is the most popular method of selecting judges in the United States. The elections are either partisan, requiring the candidates to secure an endorsement by a political party; non-partisan, requiring no political endorsements for the candidates; or retention, requiring appointed judges to face reelection to retain their seats after some time on the bench. Judicial elections were established in the nineteenth century to balance public accountability and political independence of the judges. And, with the settlement of most large-scale controversies ranging from: gun control to desegregation inside courthouses, the process of selecting judges

The Supreme Federal Tribunal judges are appointed for life and are also elected by their own Tribunal

In order for a federal judge or a Supreme Court justice to be appointed they need to be nominated by the President and the Senate. Nominations will come from several government agencies including the FBI, Congress, current judges and justices, the American Bar Association and many more. There are several judges and justices

The six methods are, Partisan election, Nonpartisan election, Appointment by legislator, Appointment by the governor, Merit Plan, and Combination. Partisan election is, when Judges are chosen in which their party affiliation is listed on the