Court Justices - Research Paper Example

Judicial Campaign Question Based on data presented in the tables, what is the difference between individual and al contributions? Which candidate raised the most money from individuals and from institutions?Answer: The individuals are the persons from public who does not belong to any business or law firm that is not having any direct personal interest. On the contrary, the institutions constitute PAC and businesses having direct interest in the selection of a particular judge. In this regard, Justice Jefferson raised 49% share of money from the individuals and 51% share of money from the institutions.

Question 2: Use the tables in the assignment to compare the differences of courtroom funds as a share of total contributions between Democratic and Republican candidates. Answer: The courtroom funds refer to the funds that raised through the money shared by the law firms and litigants having an interest in the state court. The Democratic challengers and Republican incumbents in order to defeat the opposite candidate raise courtroom funds. In this regard, the Democratic challengers raised 69% courtroom funds whereas its incumbent raised 65%; therefore, the former surpassed the latter.

Question 3: Do you agree with the line from page 5: "For many citizens the line between the role of a judge and that of a politician has become blurred". Why or why not? Answer: Yes, I agree that distinguishing line between the role of a judge and that of a politician has become blurred for many citizens. The reason for such occurrence is that the judges are elected through campaigning and raising funds, which is also the way politicians are elected. A judge is a person who has to give an impartial and fair judgement to curb menace and encourage fairness in the world.

Politicians, on the contrary, are the people who convince the public that they are the true leaders for their nation/state. However, the judges are chosen through the biased fund raising practices. The law firms (corporate defense and plaintiffs) form the largest fund raisers having their cases on the judge’s table. As a result, the judges are not selected through an impartial and fair process that thickly shadows their original role in providing justice to the victim.Question 4: How would YOU choose judges for the Supreme Court of Texas?

Answer: I would choose judge for the Supreme Court of Texas through the process of screening test, interview and demonstration test. In this case, each candidate will have to pass a screening test related to written examination. Once cleared, the short listed candidates will have to appear for an interview. Only five candidates will be short listed from the interviews who will later appear for a demonstration test where the individuals and the institutions will all be present to ask complex questions from the screened candidates.

Finally, a voting process will take place to select the final candidate. This process is fair and impartial as compared to the current practices in a way that it is based on the similar process that is used to hire personnel for all other positions. It focuses on the intellectual, educational, psychological, analytical and all other important factors which are significant for being a good, impartial and fair judge. References“Courtroom Contributions” (2008). Web 30 October 2011. Link: http://info.tpj.org/reports/courtroomcontributions/challengers.

html“Federal Selection of Judges” (2011). Web 30 October 2011. Link: http://members.mobar.org/civics/FedSelect.htm“Judge Selection and Evaluation (how Judges are selected and evaluated in courts” (2011). Web 30 October 2011. Link: http://www.utcourts.gov/knowcts/judsel.htm