How Judges are Selected in the Texas Judiciary - Essay Sample

In the United States, judges are selected through various methods. The methods vary from the popular elections to the appointment by the legislatures, chief executives, as well as other judges. Some of these methods used have depicted more effective than others, particularly in facilitating and assuring the confidence of the citizenry regarding the integrity and the quality of the courts. Some of the standard methods that have been used include partisan elections, nonpartisan elections, and legislative elections, among others (Kauffman and Bowling, 2019). Partisan elections depict a system where the people elect the judges, and the candidates are listed on the ballot with a label of the political party affiliation of the judge. The same process is repeated for the nonpartisan elections, but the ballots do not have a label. Conversely, judges can also be selected by a state legislature in some states. In Texas, judges are selected using a partisan election, which has elicited numerous concerns, despite its effectiveness.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

The structure of the judiciary of Texas has been laid out in Article 5 of the Constitution of Texas. Besides, it is defined by the statute, particularly the Texas Probate Code and the Texas Government Code, which depicts complexity that has elicited numerous cases of jurisdiction overlap. According to the provision in the constitution and the statutes, the selection process of court judges takes place in partisan elections at each of the levels of court. It should be noted that there are nine justices in the supreme court, nine criminal appeal judges, 80 court judges of appeal, and 448, district court judges across the entire appellate and the trial courts (Champagne et al. 2019). Various judicial qualifications are stipulated in the constitution and statutes. The provisions require the judges to be selected by the people, who are listed in ballot alongside their political affiliations. Partisan primaries are held in the State, where both the Democratic and the Republic candidates compete in representing their parties in the general election (Champagne et al. 2019). This method used in Texas has been depicted to be most democratic as the populace directly voices in the selection of judges. However, it has been argued that the method can lead to manipulation of the judiciary, considering the high amount of funds raised in campaigns that trigger interest groups.

Different states in the United States use various methods in the judicial selection, depending on the provisions in their constitution. Two other methods that have been commonly used include the nonpartisan elections and the legislative elections. In nonpartisan elections, primaries are held without disclosing political affiliations of the judges, when their purpose is to narrow down to the top candidates (Buenger and de Muniz, 2015). Therefore, candidates are listed without political labels, both in the primaries and the general elections. Some of the states that use this approach include Montana, Mississippi, Oregon, and Nevada, among others (Kauffman and Bowling, 2019). On the other hand, some states use the legislative election of judges. In this process, state legislators choose the judges. The general public and the governors are not involved in the process. South Carolina and Virginia are the only two states that use this judicial selection method.

Although different approaches are used in the United States in the selection of judges, the partisan judicial process offers the most benefits. Partisan elections can be considered to be the most democratic that allows people to have a direct say on the judges selected. Therefore, the voters in the state can choose a judge who reflects the values of society (Champagne et al. 2019). Besides, the process ensures judges are accountable due to the possibility of being voted out. An example is a case of judiciaries in Texas and Alabama in the 90s, where judges were observed to be inclined to the trial lawyers. Once the voters realized this, they started a revolution to replace the judges. Therefore, this partisan process benefits the voters for holding the judges accountable. However, the judges may not benefit from this process as they can, at times, be partisan to satisfy their party affiliations.

To facilitate a political process in Texas regarding partisan elections, there is a need to educate on the existing methods regarding their pros and cons. Besides, there is a need to demonstrate choice, retaining, and evaluation of judges regarding the legislative agenda in the state. In this regard, a political process would require lawmakers and the fair court advocates to work to remove the politicized judicial process to ensure impartiality, even in the partisan elections. It would also be imperative for lawmakers and special interest groups to be engaged to abolish processes that are discriminative to achieve a fair judicial process.

In conclusion, Texas is one of the states that demonstrates a partisan election of judges, a method among the many used in the United States. By engaging with a political party, there is efficient communication regarding the values and ideologies of the candidates, where the voters can easily choose from. The analysis depicts that a nonpartisan method is more democratic than the nonpartisan election or legislative election process, hence should be encouraged in more states across the US. However, measures should be taken, particularly by the lawmakers and the special interest groups, to ensure that the process is free and fair in maintaining a qualified judiciary.

Works Cited

Buenger, Michael L., and Paul J. de Muniz. 2015. American judicial power: the state court perspective. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pub.

Champagne, Anthony, Edward J. Harpham, and Jason P. Casellas. 2019. Governing Texas, 4th ed. New York: Norton & Co., Ltd. Paperback.

Kauffman, Brittany and Bowling, Cynthia. 2019. Judicial selection in the United States. University of Denver. Retrieved from: https://iaals.du.edu/projects/judicial-selection