AUSTIN – Although no system is perfect, judicial appointments would minimize the “cancer” causing judges to solicit campaign contributions from lawyers, concluded one of the chairs tapped to examine how judges are selected in Texas.
The Texas Commission on Judicial Selection released its findings last week, recommending against the continuation of partisan elections for judicial offices.
Texas is one of six states that still hold partisan elections for all judicial offices.
Along with the report, some of the commissioners submitted letters, including Vice Chair Charles “Chip” Babcock.
“Although no system is perfect, an appointment/retention plan that includes safeguards to ensure diversity would minimize the current cancer on our system that, is causing our judges to solicit campaign contributions in ever-expanding amounts, mostly from lawyers and interested parties, thereby lowering confidence in the fairness of our justice system in the eyes of the public,” Babcock wrote.
“Texas demands that its judges and judicial candidates ‘act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.’ Yet our current system forces them to do the exact opposite by requiring both incumbent judges and judicial candidates to raise money from lawyers and parties with cases that are or will likely be before them thereby accepting financial assistance, sometimes unknowingly, from industries with recurring matters before the courts.”
TCJS’s report found data suggesting voters were exhibiting strong straight-ticket voting behavior.
“The data indicates that when straight-ticket voting was not available, many voters still replicated the straight ticket manually and voted on down ballot races,” the report states. “Specifically, in judicial selection based on partisan elections, voters typically have very little, if any, knowledge of judicial candidates nor the experience to evaluate them.
“The literature suggests that voters know little about the quality of judicial candidates and hence their decisions are mainly influenced by party affiliations.”
TCJS made the following recommendations:
- A majority of the commissioners recommend against the continuation of our partisan judicial selection system;
- A majority of the commissioners recommend against the adoption of a nonpartisan judicial selection system;
- When focusing on the alternative of an appointive judicial selection system followed by a retention election, seven commissioners recommend in favor of such a system and seven commissioners recommend against (with one abstention);
- The commissioners overwhelmingly recommend increasing the minimum qualifications of our judges;
- The commissioners overwhelmingly recommend the adoption of rules to regulate further the role of money in judicial elections;
- The commissioners, with two abstentions, unanimously reject term limits for our judges; and
- The commission was unanimous that any change to the status quo should not impact the judges selected under the current system.
The Texas Commission on Judicial Selection was established in 2019 by the 86th Legislature through House Bill 3040.