The advocate - Book Report/Review Example

Most significantly, it will indulge in the discussion of the benefits of this form of selection, the influence of campaign funds on the outcomes of the courts' litigation processes and the public perception as a result of the same in the states where it is predominantly practiced. Furthermore, it will provide the analysis and propositions on policies that seek to improve the outcomes of this method of selecting judges. In the onset, the paper identifies the factors that make partisan election method stand out among the other methods in terms of public involvement and accountability of the judges and the courts to the wider nation.

The studies and surveys analyzed in this paper from the state bar of Texas publication of 2010 and Shackelford K. and Butterfield J. 2010 gives various eventualities that followed and are associated with partisan election of judges and succeeds the discussion on the federal appointments of judges and the Missouri plan as methods of selection. Judge selection methods There are three predominant methods of judge selections that are applied at various levels in the states. . He the forwards the name of the senate/legislature for approval and confirmation hence appointment.

This method is seen as good because there is involvement of the people to some extent. The governor is elected by the people and therefore acts on behalf of the people thus they are involved. However it is worth noting that in this form of appointment the people are only involved indirectly and this brings to question the vital pillars of the judiciary; independence, accountability, efficiency and impartiality (Shackelford and Butterfield, 2010). The second method of judicial selection as a way of reforming the judiciary and improving its independence is by use of the Missouri plan.

This protocol of selecting judges was first employed in the state of Missouri in the 1940 and it is a way in which there is an attempt to improve the independence of the judiciary (Shackelford and Butterfield, 2010). The process involves the selection of elites from the field of law and justice who select a list of candidates as a panel and present the list to the governor who then approves and selects the people he/ she is given. In case the governor refuses to appoint the person/ people provided, the panel goes ahead to appoint them.

The person selected can then be subjected to popular election after a certain amount of time to determine whether they should go for a second term or not without a challenger (Shackelford and Butterfield, 2010). In as much as it seeks to segregate justice from political systems, this method is perceived to do very little in creating independence of the judge and the court because it creates an atmosphere of boardroom appointment of judges by the hands of political players and special interest groups, hence making it more political than it is intended,