Basically, our TN State Constitution stipulates plainly that high court judges/justices must face contested elections. This continued until the early 1970s. When the GOP captured the Governorship, both Senate seats (and briefly, control of the House of Representatives from 1969-71), legislative Democrats were terrified the GOP would similarly capture the judiciary (which had been solidly Democrat since Reconstruction).
If I recall correctly, there was a ballot initiative put up for the voters (early ‘70s) that would change said method of contested elections. The voters said “NO” and kept it as is. The legislative Democrats ignored it and passed a plan called “Missouri Modified.” This entirely removed the people’s input on elected judges, blatantly unconstitutional.
The process would now be as such: candidates would submit their names before a group of elite trial lawyers (nearly all Democrat and increasingly leftist). Trial lawyers would whittle down the names to a handful (again, almost entirely Dem/leftist) and the Governor would choose said appointee. If the Governor refused, the trial lawyers would be empowered to select and seat said judge/justice (although I’m not sure it ever happened — in one instance under Bredesen, who was unhappy with the choices, he demanded a new group of names be submitted to him).
Mind you, as not to appear utterly partisan, some Republicans (of the establishment vintage, non-Conservative) were put up and a few landed on the bench. The sole input of the voters is a simple “retain/reject” vote every 6 or 8 years (I forgot the term). Most importantly in keeping a Democrat majority on the bench is that the Supreme Court then elects the Attorney General (the only such way that officer is elected in any state, a highly byzantine manner, and Democrat since Reconstruction). Both will continue to say it is “Constitutional” to have these methods of selection, but the Constitution says otherwise.
John Jay Hooker has spent many years now making it his life mission to restore the Constitutional requirements of election of judges. I expected the GOP legislature to push through the repeal of Missouri Modified, but they have dragged their feet and decided to try another push to have the Governor appoint them (via Constitutional Amendment), which will be on the November ballot. In the meantime, the Lieutenant Governor tried to campaign (without the help of the Governor and GOP establishment) to have 3 of the justices rejected earlier this month in the retention elections. Unfortunately, all were retained. With that, the sitting Dem Attorney General will be able to have himself elected to another 8 year term.
Wow, that is a gross constitutional violation, even worse than NY courts allowing Patterson to appoint a Lieutenant Governor and Roberts upholding Obamacare.
And the AG is chosen by the Supreme Court? That’s pretty lame. If it’s not elected statewide (which it should be), it should be appointed by the Governor.