[ThJ1800]

Personally, I do not support the idea of an elected judiciary, but I was wondering what y'all's opinion on the matter might be.

[Bogey78O]

I'm against an elected judiciary.

If that was the case we'd see judges base their rulings on what gets them elected.

Despite the flaws the federal system is pretty good.

[Quix]

I guess I could argue both sides.

But mostly, now, I am on the side of electing.

Of course, that requires a very informed electrate. And I don't know if the education or IQ's of some of the many I see on the street and in shops is up to choosing their ice cream flavor, much less their judges.

Nevertheless, I believe that on the whole, the average citizens are pretty sharp--especially in most of Texas.

The thing I object to is having judges who are atnys.

I believe ALL judges and especially in the USA Supreme court should be wise codgers judged top flight in their ethics and integrity--as well as humble and practical. And I think it should be against the constitution to allow atnys to be judges. It's bad enough that they have a lock on congress etc. What cozy club.

I don't think atnys have a nitty gritty enough stake in what it means to be a common man, on average, to serve as dog catcher, much less judge.

[writmeister]

Having lived in a state with the retention system (Missouri) and a state with the election system (Texas), I can tell you that an elected judiciary is infinitely preferable. The retention system simply does not work (unless your secret goal is lifetime appointments) because judges are almost never un-retained.

In my experience practicing law, I can tell that there is nothing worse than a judge who thinks he/she is invulnerable.

[merrin]

I agree with you. Elected judges are bad news.

Then again, I'm a terrible undemocratic elitist.

[Teetop]

Personally, if I can still shoot a scum-bag for stealing something on my property, as I can now in Texas, I don't care....

[umbagi]

I'm a "recovering lawyer," and have practiced in many Texas counties.

In some of those counties -- especially the larger ones, unfortunately -- the District Judges spend more time raising money for re-election than they do on the bench.

In election years, I spent more time going to $100-a-plate barbecues than I did trying cases. Some judges you knew were above favoritism; some were known practitioners of it; some of them, you just didn't know. Most of us went to all the barbecues, and made sure the judge saw us there; we wanted to support the first group, we wanted the second group to treat us "fairly," and we couldn't take a chance on the third group.

Thanks for posting this; I'll be contacting my legislators and asking them to support a "Missouri Plan" law for Texas!

u

[greasepaint]

What is the name of the Justice who is against elected judges.
I want to know who not to vote for.

[deport]

Doesn't this require a Constitutional Amendment? There are four bills filed addressing this item..... I haven't read them but the State Constitution speaks to this issue.

[Proud_texan]

I have three words in favor of elected judges:

William Wayne Justice

Had old Will been up for election in Texas he would have come in a distant third in a one person race. As flawed as the elected system is it sure beats the alternative.

[Bigun]

I'm a Texan who will do EVERYTHING in his power to ensure that we continue to elect them!

[RJL]

Now, as Republicans have gained the complete control of all facets of state government for the first time in modern history, the Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court wants to take away that 153-year old right by creating an appointment/retention system.

Kinda funny how this system was just fine while Democrats were being elected, but now that the Republicans are being elected the system needs to be changed.