Home Programs Advocacy About Us Awards & Events News Publications


Committee for Modern Courts Judicial Selection 2003 Policy Statement

The method of selecting judges in New York State has a direct and significant impact on the fair and efficient administration of justice.  The Committee for Modern Courts has adopted the following statement, which at this time sets out, in broad principles only, our position regarding judicial selection for judges in the state

 
1. The Committee for Modern Courts, as it has since its inception in 1955, calls for the adoption and public ratification of a Constitutional Amendment to expand the use of merit selection to choose judges statewide in New York.  Merit selection represents the best method of limiting external pressures on judicial selection, and diminishing the role of money and politics on the process.
 
2. Until a Merit Selection Constitutional Amendment is passed by the Legislature and ratified in a public referendum, the Committee for Modern Courts calls for the adoption of rules and procedures to improve the process of judicial elections.  Reform of the judicial election process will more effectively limit the influence of partisan politics, decrease the role of campaigning and fundraising, and help to safeguard the independence and integrity of the judiciary.  Such reform should be instituted without delay by political parties and appointing authorities, and should also be advanced through legislation.  Reform should, at a minimum, consist of the following:
 
  a. Nomination Process Reform
    Judicial Nominations:  Before any candidate can be nominated for a judicial office in the State of New York, there should be a meaningful evaluation of the candidate’s qualifications by an independent panel.  Only candidates who have been found “well qualified” by such a panel should be nominated for judicial office.  The independent panel members should be selected by independent and diverse organizations or appointing authorities, should represent the broad diversity of the area, and should include laypersons as members.  There should be a limit (typically three) on the number of candidates who are approved by the panel for nomination for each judicial vacancy.  If the panel finds an elected incumbent “well qualified,” no other candidate should be approved by the panel for nomination to that judicial position.
 
  b.   Campaign Finance and Disclosure
   

Voluntary Public Finance System: A public finance system should be adopted through legislation for all judicial candidates in the State of New York.  Candidates opting into the public financing system should be subject to contribution limits, campaign spending limits, and threshold requirements to qualify for the finance system.  Candidates who meet the requirements should be provided with public matching funds to ensure adequate resources to operate a campaign, particularly in cases where an opponent has opted out of the campaign finance system.  To ensure a candidate's right to free expression, any public finance system should be voluntary.  The proposed campaign finance system should be similar to that used by the New York City Campaign Finance Board.

Disclosure: For judicial candidates inside and outside the voluntary public finance system, there should be a timely campaign donation disclosure requirement, indicating the candidate's name, donor's name, donor's affiliation, date of donation, dollar amount, and source (individual/corporate/law firm/political action committee) of each campaign contribution.  Further, candidates should be required to submit detailed campaign expenditure reports, and the donation and expenditure information should be easily available to the public through the Internet.

Voter Guides: Voters should be provided with meaningful and objective informationabout judicial candidates in advance of an election.  The best method to achieve this is to include judicial candidates in voter guides produced by a Board of Elections or other independent organization.  Voter guides listing each candidate's qualifications, professional background, and screening panel and other ratings should be distributed to all eligible voters prior to an election.

 
  c. Fair Campaign Practices Committees
Bar Associations and other organizations in each County or Judicial District should establish Fair Campaign Practices Committees, as proposed by the New York State Bar Association and the State court system, to address inappropriate judicial campaign activities.  The Committees should educate judicial candidates about campaign rules, secure pledges from candidates to campaign in a dignified and ethical manner, and resolve disputes regarding judicial campaigns.  Fair Campaign Practices Committees should be distinct from the local Bar Associations' Judicial Screening Committees.


Testimony

January 8, 2007
Victor A. Kovner
Chair, Committee for Modern Courts
Public Hearings on the Selection of New York State Supreme Court Justices held before the New York State Senate Standing Committee on the Judiciary

November 15, 2006
Victor A. Kovner
Chair, Committee for Modern Courts
Public Hearings on the Selection of New York State Supreme Court Justices held before the New York State Assembly Standing Committee on the Judiciary


Memos
Fund for Modern Courts Amicus Brief in Lopez Torres (PDF; 1.2MB)

Press

Questions about Advocacy?
Send us an email at
advocacy@moderncourts.org

 

Home Site Map Contact Us
© 2003 The Fund for Modern Courts
351 West 54th Street New York, N.Y. 10019
Tel.: 212.541.6741
Fax: 212.541.7301
justice@moderncourts.org