Reflections on Why Texas Should Make Changes to Judicial Selection

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Reflections on Why Texas Should Make Changes to Judicial Selection

The US runs an exciting judicial system, where different states retain the right to determine the way to have judges in the courtrooms. Some states consider governor appointments, while others prefer to have partisan elections determine the judges to grace the court sessions. Texas is one of the states that has maintained the use of the partisan election of judges for years. This paper discusses why I believe Texas should consider the state-level judges being appointed by the Texas governor with the approval of the Texas Senate.

Just like other elections, the partisan elections for judges are highly publicized events in Texas. The elections are the center for huge funding with both individuals and donors offering support to different parties seeking the position of judges in the state courts. To maintain sanity in funding, different limits of financial support have been developed. For example, the Judicial Campaign Fairness Act in 1995 requires that individual contribution to hopeful judges for individuals not to exceed $5,000 to 30,000 for the law firms (National Center for State Courts, n.d.). Considerable interests from the investors and law firms have caused problems on the objectiveness of the judges in making decisions that touch on the donors. Considering that Texas is largely a one-party state, there is a concern on justice for all in the judicial system, as judges may wish to promote their election interests while making judgments.

I undoubtedly support the appointment of judges by the governor with the approval of the Texas Senate. Using this framework sounds official and helps separate the process of judge appointment from political pressures and undue influence. One of the greatest weaknesses of the election of the judges is the temptation of conflict of interest when the judges assume the podium in deciding cases (Champagne et al., 2013). Law firms invest heavily in their preferred candidates, which creates an impression of safeguarding their position for the cases they may be pushing in courts of law. Judges would feel the pressure when making judgments on cases involving their campaign sponsors. Similarly, the individuals who actively participated in the judges’ campaigns would mount unduly influence the judicial opinions in court cases. As a way of avoiding such cases, the governor should take charge of judges’ appointments with the approval of the Texas Senate.

The involvement of the Texas Senate makes the difference. Before judges get the mantle to serve, the Texas Senate will be sure of their suitability. Areas of concern may include background checks, the vision the judge wishes to achieve, and how it collectively adds up to the US judicial system. The best way to have the best judges serving is to ensure that there is a thorough process that ensures only the qualified judges interested in serving the community get a chance to listen and determine cases. For this to happen, the appointment process should be withdrawn from the political sphere and be entrusted to relatively independent minds.

However, it is worth noting that either election or appointment of judges carries different drawbacks. Although judges’ appointment by governors under the watch of Texas Senate is preferred, there is concern that governors and the Texas Senate may prioritize candidates they feel may promote their interests. It means that this method may also open up grounds for conflicts of interest. Nevertheless, being a two-stage process that involves the governor’s opinion and oversight from the Texas Senate, the process is more appealing.

I uphold that Texas should consider the option of state-level judges being appointed by the Texas governor with the approval of the Texas Senate. Electing judges creates loopholes for conflict of interests as campaign sponsors may demand favor in return for the support they showed. The process also paints a tainted image to the judicial system due to politicizing the process, and this may impact on the independence of the sector. It is better judges are appointed by governors with the approval of the Texas Senate as this option allows thorough scrutiny of the potential judges. Such a process will ensure only qualified judges get a chance to handle judicial matters.

Click Here To Order Now!