The conclusion briefly summarizes the results, including a table that lists each state covered and assesses the relative importance of politics/policy versus professionalism in each. There has been a temporal change in the central motivation for change efforts: a shift around 2000 from primary emphasis professionalism to politics/policy. Two other important patterns are also discussed, First, the preference for a more political/policy-driven approach to judicial selection used to be associated with the political left but is increasingly coming from the right side of the political spectrum; two possible explanations for this change are discussed. The second pattern the greater willingness of citizens to surrender their role in contested judicial elections for appellate courts than for local trial courts. To explore this latter point, a short survey was conducted asking respondents to rate the importance of characteristics to be considered in selecting judges. Legal professionalism characteristics tended to be rated as more important than political characteristics, and this was particularly true for state supreme court justices as compared to local trial judges.

Tennessee represents a new trend in changing judicial selection: eliminating the constraint that appointees must be recommended by a nominating commission that is the central element of the Missouri Plan. In the 1970s, the Tennessee legislature adopted a version of the Missouri Plan for the state’s appellate courts; however, the Democratic majority in the legislature quickly repealed it for the Tennessee Supreme Court. It was readopted for the Supreme Court in the early 1990s. The Missouri Plan withstood court challenges asserting that the legislature had exceeded its constitutional power by implementing that system without a constitutional amendment. However, dissatisfaction with the system continued, and the Missouri Plan started to come under attack. In 2014, the Republican-controlled legislature submitted a constitutional amendment to the voters that provided for gubernatorial appointment of any person with the legal qualifications, confirmation by the General Assembly, and retention through retention elections. The amendment was approved.