The Election of Judges Despite a lack of consensus among legal commentators, there is a clear answer to the debate about whether judges should be elected or appointed. America is a democracy; it is...

The Election of Judges

Despite a lack of consensus among legal commentators, there is a clear answer to the debate about whether judges should be elected or appointed. America is a democracy; it is only right that the American people should get to elect all judges. Like the legislative and executive branches of government, the judicial branch functions to provide services to the American people. Those very people deserve to elect their judges just as they elect members of Congress and the president. One of the keys to democracy is having a responsible and responsive government. Judges will be neither responsible nor responsive unless they must face the American people periodically and ask for their votes. Part of holding judges accountable for their legal decisions is not only choosing to elect or reelect them, but also having the ability to remove a judge who is not performing his duty adequately. The American people should have the option of removing judges who fail to uphold the standards and morals of the community. Accordingly, allowing voters to have recall elections would further prevent judges from engaging in undue judicial activism. Judges who are appointed for life terms are beholden to no one; that life tenure challenges the very essence of democracy. Sometimes a judge’s ideology or judicial philosophy will change over time; this change affects the decisions the judge will make. When a judge changes her decision-making process, she is no longer staying true to why she was elected in the first place. One way to fix unexpected changes is to have periodic elections for judges. These elections will help to keep judges consistent in their rulings and interpretations, while also preventing surprises for the American people who elected the judges in the first place. By having elections, out-of-touch judges who do not reflect the current social climate can be removed in favor of judges who are in touch with the American people. This last point has the added benefit of possibly bringing younger people to the bench, thus opening up the possibility for a wider group of Americans to shape the law.

 1. How would you frame the issue and conclusion of this essay?

 2. What ethical norms does the author primarily rely on in arguing for why judges should be elected?

 3. Part of being a critical thinker is avoiding the temptation to dichotomize (look at everything as an either-or situation) and to look for other reasonable alternatives. Does the author engage in any dichotomous thinking? If so, what are other reasonable alternatives? Clue: What either-or situations does the author create, and are there third and fourth possibilities?

4. Write an essay that someone who holds an opinion opposite to that of the essay author might write. Clue: What other ethical norms could influence an opinion on this issue?