Book contents
- Judicial Selection in the States
- Judicial Selection in the States
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Preface
- Table of Cases
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Change as an Exercise in Partisan Politics
- Part II Change as Court Modernization or Good Government
- 6 Georgia
- 7 Mississippi
- 8 Utah
- 9 New Mexico
- 10 Connecticut, Rhode Island, and South Carolina
- Part III Unsuccessful Change Efforts
- Index
10 - Connecticut, Rhode Island, and South Carolina
Adding “Merit” to Nonelective Systems
from Part II - Change as Court Modernization or Good Government
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 April 2020
- Judicial Selection in the States
- Judicial Selection in the States
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Preface
- Table of Cases
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Change as an Exercise in Partisan Politics
- Part II Change as Court Modernization or Good Government
- 6 Georgia
- 7 Mississippi
- 8 Utah
- 9 New Mexico
- 10 Connecticut, Rhode Island, and South Carolina
- Part III Unsuccessful Change Efforts
- Index
Summary
Connecticut, Rhode Island, and South Carolina do not use any form of popular election in selecting state judges. Selection is (or was) through either election by the legislature or appointment by the governor. In each of the three states, one or more controversies surrounding either the selection process or serving judges provided the impetus for changes that required persons selected as judges to have been screened and either approved or recommended by a committee or commission. In Connecticut and Rhode Island, the screening body forwards a short list to the selecting authority; in South Carolina, the screening body reviews applications from persons who desire to be on a list of those eligible for appointment in the future. To the extent that partisanship influenced the change process, it was primarily focused on the composition of the screening body rather than on whether there should be such a body.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Judicial Selection in the StatesPolitics and the Struggle for Reform, pp. 204 - 238Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020