judgesonmerit.org

Paul Carpenter of the Allentown Morning Call devoted his weekend column to a call for Merit Selection.  He reasons that the role of money in the judicial election process poisons the judicial system:

The problem should be obvious to anyone. A child in grade school can see why there’s a conflict if a judge in a position to rule on a legal dispute takes money from somebody with a vital financial interest in that case.

Carpenter spoke with PMC’s Lynn Marks:

”Pennsylvanians should not take pride in leading the nation in spending for judicial elections,” Marks told me. ”Each dollar raised and spent raises yet another doubt in voters’ minds about whether or not justice is for sale.”

Carpenter agreed, arguing “How is it possible for a judicial candidate with a shred of integrity to accept. . . money . . .  [from]  lawyers, law firms and lobbyists with ties to law firms having business before the Supreme Court.”

Unfortunately, under our current system of electing judges, these contributions are legal.  And, the judges are not required to recuse from cases involving campaign contributors.  This all leads the public to be concerned about the influence of money on judicial decisions.

Carpenter argues that the money problem causes a “stench” in our courts.  He urges reform:

That stench can be ended only one way — the merit selection of appellate judges, instead of letting their elections depend on millions of dollars in ”contributions” from lawyers and others with a stake in how these courts rule.

We hope the legislature will begin the process that will let Pennsylvanians decide how to address the problems caused by money in judicial elections.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS