Elon Law professor Scott Gaylord reviewed the status of judicial selection procedures in North Carolina in a presentation before the North Carolina Bar Association's (NCBA) Judicial Independence Committee on October 4.
The committee is charged with reviewing the state’s system for selecting judges and advising on reforms to improve the system.
In his presentation, Gaylord noted three issues focusing attention on the state’s judicial elections this year:
- instant runoff voting for court of appeals candidates,
- a recent study explaining the increase in spending in state judicial elections, and
- three recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions that bear on judicial elections.
The Supreme Court decisions reviewed by Gaylord included:
- Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., Inc.,
- Citizens United v. Fed. Elections Comm’n, and
- McComish v. Bennett, with reviews of that case provided here and here, reflecting plaintiffs’ and defendants’ perspectives respectively.
Gaylord also provided an overview of judicial elections in North Carolina, noting that the judges were appointed by the General Assembly prior to 1868, the year the North Carolina Constitution was created, which established an electoral system for judicial selection in the state.
Gaylord identified seven failed attempts in the state legislature since 1974 to change the method of judicial selection in the state, as well as three legislative efforts that succeeded in modifying North Carolina’s judicial elections, including the creation of nonpartisan elections for superior court judges (1996), district court judges (2001), and supreme court and court of appeals judges (2002), the establishment of a voluntary public financing system for judicial elections (2002), and the new requirement that a voter guide be created for all appellate court elections (2002).
The NCBA’s Judicial Independence Committee seeks to improve the methods of selection of judges and justices by promoting judicial independence. The Committee furthers this goal by increasing public and legislative awareness of the importance of an impartial and independent judiciary.
Click here for additional information about Scott Gaylord.