This is a printer friendly version of an article from
www.goupstate.com
To print this article open the file menu and choose
Print.
Back
Article published Jun 2, 2004
Popular election of judges would erode their
independence
The Rev. Jesse Jackson renewed his call this week
for the popular election of judges in South Carolina.State judges are elected by
the General Assembly. Jackson wants them to be elected by the people.He says
this would allow the state to have more African-American judges. Almost a third
of South Carolina's population is black, but fewer than 7 percent of the state's
judges are black.Jackson may have a point about black judges. A judiciary that
better represented the demographics of the state might instill more confidence
in our criminal and civil justice system.But Jackson proposes the wrong
solution. Popular election of judges would erode their independence.If your case
comes before a judge, do you want that judge thinking only of the evidence and
the law, or do you want him thinking about how the outcome of your case would
play to the voters in the next election?Judges are supposed to be impartial.
They are supposed to consider the law and the facts. They are supposed to be
removed from political influences and from the feelings of the community.Poll
numbers should not influence the outcome of criminal and civil cases. But even
the best judge may find it hard to ignore popular sentiment if he is up for
re-election in the fall.Popular election would also transform judges into
candidates. They would have to raise campaign funds and campaign for votes.That
adds a whole new range of concerns for them. Instead of considering the law and
the facts of a case, judges might be tempted to consider the interests of their
primary campaign donors and supporters.Who would be most likely to donate to
judicial candidates? Lawyers. Who in this state wants to go to court wondering
whether his lawyer has made the proper campaign contributions to the
judge?Jackson insists on speaking of judges as if they were representatives
expected to represent the concerns of their voters. He has compared them to city
council members. He said this week that "they must represent constituencies."He
is completely wrong. Judges rule on the law. They interpret the law. They do not
represent anyone's political will.Forcing judges to become politicians will not
improve the quality of justice in South Carolina.