Arkansas judges express preference for election | Arkansas Blog

Thursday, October 20, 2016

Arkansas judges express preference for election

Posted By on Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 11:59 AM

click to enlarge FOR ELECTIONS: Board of Directors of the Arkanass Judicial Council.
  • FOR ELECTIONS: Board of Directors of the Arkanass Judicial Council.
The Arkansas Judicial Council, the assembly of all state circuit and appellate judges, voted overwhelmingly last week to oppose any proposal for appointment rather than election of judges.

A judge who was in attendance provided this summary (he preferred not to be named):

The Board of Directors of the group proposed a resolution to the group, which met last week in Rogers. The resolution stated opposition to appointment of judges and justices and favoring elections. 

The vote by all judges present in favor of the resolution was "nearly unanimous." There was little discussion before the vote.

Note that the resolution was general. It did not specifically address the Arkansas Bar Association proposal for selection of Supreme Court justices based on recommendations of a nominating commission to a single 14-year term. Nor did it address the governor's preference for straight gubernatorial appointment, with confirmation by the Senate.

The vote reflects my earlier report that a move from elections was not popular with several Supreme Court justices at a minimum. But it also suggests  judicial opposition is broader and deeper than I suspected.

Conventional wisdom holds that Arkansas voters prefer elections, too. Any change would have to come through constitutional amendment. The legislature will consider next year whether to put an amendment on the ballot. 

Does judicial opposition suggest some fear they might not meet a qualifying standard for appointment? Or is it just grassroots populism? Are voters well-equipped to make judicial choices? Has dark money made choices even more problematic? All questions for the great minds of the legislature to ponder in January.

A better intermediate step would be to require full disclosure of sources of money spent on judicial races. It can be done, if only the legislature would. But special interests love being able to influence judicial selections from cover, without revealing their true agendas when they air hundreds of thousands in misleading advertising.

Tags: , , , , ,

From the ArkTimes store


Comments (3)

Showing 1-3 of 3

Add a comment

Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-3 of 3

Add a comment

More by Max Brantley

Readers also liked…

  • Kenneth Starr: A comment from Betsey Wright

    Betsey Wright, former President Bill Clinton's chief of staff when he was Arkansas governor, responds bitterly to a New York Times article today quoting Whitewater Prosecutor Kenneth Starr's warm words about Clinton. She can't forget the lives Starr ruined in Arkansas.
    • May 24, 2016
  • Baseball fans have a new place to stay

    If you missed out on Razorback baseball home games this year because you couldn’t find a great place to stay, your problem is now solved: Staybridge Suites of Fayetteville is now fully renovated and located directly across from Baum Stadium, with free parking for hotel guests.
    • May 22, 2017
  • The long and winding road: No exception yet for 30 Crossing

    The Arkansas highway department's representative on the Metroplan board of directors told the board today that the department is requesting an exception to the planning agency's cap on six lanes for its 30 Crossing project to widen Interstate 30 from six to 10 (and more) lanes.
    • Jun 29, 2016

Most Shared

Most Recent Comments



© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation