Explain the three primary methods of how judges are employed. Of the three which one do you feel is the best method of employing judges?

Discussion Board Postings: Each week, there will be a required discussion board posting made by the instructor. Each student responds to the instructor’s initial response by Thursday evening, after which the posting becomes available. Each student will then respond to a minimum of two (2) of your classmates’ postings. The responses will have no word limit but must contain substantive content that would move a discussion forward. Comments that merely agree or compliment their classmates’ postings will not receive credit. These postings will be graded based on how well the student addresses both the professor’s and fellow students’ responses. A good rule of thumb would be that the initial response would be approximately 250 words, and your classmates’ responses will be between 150 to 200 words (but can certainly be more than this amount).

Required Discussion Five: Judicial Appointments
Explain the three primary methods of how judges are employed. Of the three, which one do you feel is the best method of employing judges?

Respond To: Clayton Kloehn

There are three primary methods for how a Judge is selected in the majority of the world. Firstly, a judge may be appointed. This is done normally in Common law governments, and they are normally appointed by the executive branch of the government or by a special committee. Secondly, a judge may be selected based on having chosen that career path. This is typical in civil law countries. They attend specialized schooling, are required to take advanced examinations, and often are required to conduct an apprenticeship before being allowed to decide the law. Thirdly, a judge can be elected to their position by the citizens. This is the least common method, but elections and combined methods are frequently used in the United States. Specifically, the Missouri Plan is a combined method that selects a judge by committee. After spending some time in office, it is then reviewed on the public ballot for continued service.
I believe that a combination method serves municipalities better than a fully appointed approach. This ensures that the Judge understands the community that they serve and aligns themselves with local social norms and customs. I do not believe that Judicial responsibilities should be baselined. I think that local and municipal adjudicators should be required to work with their community and have the flexibility to develop community involved courts.
My home of record Outagamie County, Wisconsin, uses a combined approach to judge selection. The courts have established programs to include community intervention programs for non-violent offenders, established juvenile courts overseen by citizen boards, and implemented community service programs instead of imprisonment. These programs are overseen by the appointed and then citizen confirmed judges and District Attorney’s offices. I believe the flexibility to accommodate each municipality’s unique circumstance is a very effective approach versus an appointment-only system.

Respond to: Camryn Crum

The three primary methods to judges are appointment, Career choice path, and Citizen election.
Appointment, on the other hand, comes in various forms. It is conceivable that an appointive system could be what some observers call “one-person judicial selection” in other words, a chief executive, such as a governor, county executive, or mayor, is granted the power to decide whom to appoint to the bench. While some appointive systems may indeed amount to little more than this, some checks on the chief executive’s authority of appointment usually exist as a practical matter. One example is a requirement that a legislative body confirms the candidate chosen. Another twist on the straight appointive system occurs in Virginia, where the state legislature appoints all judges.
A career choice path is where individuals decide on their own to become judges either during or immediately after their legal training. This is someone who wants to work really hard and get right into the swing of things with no hesitation.
Of course, Election is just what it sounds like: Candidates run in partisan campaigns, and the voters choose their judges in ordinary elections. Those who favor elections argue that the people are given a voice in the third branch of government, that the people are permitted to choose their own judicial “representatives,”; and that judges will assume office based on the majority’s will on nepotism or personal connections. Some also believe that election increases diversity on the bench.
It is a hard choice for me to pick which would be the best me for us to use because I feel like I would have chosen election because I feel as if that would be the best. Still, with everything that has potentially gone on in the past election, I would say maybe the fairest would be a career choice path because after someone has done all of the hard work, you would think they would want to be in such a high up position and everything they had just learned is fresh on their mind. Like I said, I keep going back and forth because I do also strongly feel like they should be chosen by the people as long as it is completely fair.
Methods of Judicial Selection. (n.d.). Retrieved February 02, 2021, from https://moderncourts.org/programs-advocacy/judicial-selection/methods-of-judicial-selection/ (Links to an external site.)