Why should judges be appointed by experts, as explained in the Missouri plan, not by the people in open elections as we do now?
The Missouri Plan is a method for selecting judges that combines elements of appointment and election. It was designed to balance the need for expert legal knowledge with democratic principles.
Now, to understand why judges should be appointed by experts rather than elected in open elections, we need to consider a few key reasons:
1. Expertise: Judges play a critical role in interpreting and applying laws in a fair and impartial manner. They require deep legal knowledge, experience, and a well-developed understanding of legal principles. By appointing judges through a merit-based system, the focus is on selecting individuals who possess the necessary qualifications and expertise to make informed and reasoned judgments.
2. Independence: Judges should be able to make impartial decisions without the influence of political or popular pressures. By appointing judges, we create a separation between their decision-making process and electoral politics. This helps to ensure that judges are able to make rulings based solely on the law and the facts of the case, rather than being swayed by public opinion or political considerations.
3. Accountability: While some argue that elected judges are more accountable to the people, the reality is that judges should be accountable to the law and the Constitution, rather than to the public's fluctuating preferences. By appointing judges through a process that involves vetting by legal experts and other professionals, we create a system that holds judges accountable to their professional standards and ethics rather than short-term public sentiment.
4. Professionalism and Diversity: The appointment of judges through a merit-based system allows for a more diverse and inclusive judiciary. It enables the selection of judges based on their legal qualifications, rather than their ability to campaign or fundraise. This increases the likelihood of having a judiciary that reflects the diversity of society in terms of race, gender, background, and perspectives.
In contrast, open elections for judges can introduce several challenges. Judges may have to campaign, raise funds, and make promises to gain popular support, which can compromise their impartiality and independence. Moreover, voters may not have the necessary information or expertise to evaluate the qualifications of judicial candidates, leading to decisions based on name recognition or popularity rather than merit.
It's important to note that these arguments are not without criticism, and the debate regarding judicial selection methods continues. The Missouri Plan, with its combination of a merit-based selection process followed by retention elections, is one of the ways in which concerns about expertise and accountability can be balanced with democratic principles. Ultimately, the goal is to ensure a judiciary that is knowledgeable, independent, accountable, and reflective of the diverse society it serves.