California Commission on Judicial Appointments

Last updated

The California Commission on Judicial Appointments is a body of the government of California established in its current form in 1979 that is responsible for reviewing and confirming justices appointed by the Governor of California to the Supreme Court of California and judges appointed by the Governor to the California Courts of Appeal. [1] The commission consists of the Chief Justice, the Attorney General of California, and the state's senior presiding justice of the California Courts of Appeal. [2] The senior Associate Justice fills the Chief Justice's spot on the commission when a new Chief Justice is nominated.

Government of California

The government of California is the governmental structure of the state of California as established by the California Constitution. It is composed of three branches: the executive, consisting of the Governor of California and the other constitutionally elected and appointed officers and offices; the legislative, consisting of the California State Legislature, which includes the Assembly and the Senate; and the judicial, consisting of the Supreme Court of California and lower courts. There is also local government, consisting of counties, cities, special districts, and school districts, as well as government entities and offices that operate independently on a constitutional, statutory, or common law basis. The state also allows direct participation of the electorate by initiative, referendum, recall and ratification.

Governor of California Head of Government in the US State of California

The Governor of California is the head of government of the U.S. state of California. The California Governor is the chief executive of the state government and the commander-in-chief of the California National Guard and the California State Military Reserve.

Supreme Court of California the highest court in the U.S. state of California

The Supreme Court of California is the highest and final court in the courts of the State of California. It resides inside the Earl Warren Building in San Francisco, overlooking Civic Center Square along with City Hall. It also holds sessions in Los Angeles and Sacramento. Its decisions are binding on all other California state courts.

The Commission initially continued the evaluative role of its predecessor, the California Commission on Judicial Qualifications, and was first proposed for that purpose through a ballot proposition in the election of November 1960. [3] In 1961, California Assemblyman John A. Busterud proposed to expand the power of the Commission to require its approval for the Governor to appoint judges, [4] which was endorsed by Caspar Weinberger. [5] A bill to that effect was introduced in 1963. [6]

John A. Busterud was an Assemblyman in the California legislature for the 22nd District. During World War II he served in the United States Army. He became a Lieutenant Colonel. He was also Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, was married to Anne Witwer and had three children: John, James and Mary. He is the author of "Below The Salt," an account of the 90th Infantry Division and its capture of the German gold reserves at Merkers Mine in World War II.

Caspar Weinberger American politician

Caspar Willard "Cap" Weinberger was an American politician and businessman. As a prominent Republican, he served in a variety of state and federal positions for three decades, including Chairman of the California Republican Party, 1962–68. Most notably he was Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan from 1981 to 1987.

The Commission has been criticized by various groups since shortly after its creation. [7] A 2012 study of court appointment systems found that the existence of the Commission increased the chances that a California governor would appoint justices with a different party affiliation from their own. [8]

Related Research Articles

The Missouri Plan is a method for the selection of judges. It originated in Missouri in 1940 and has been adopted by several states of the United States. Similar methods are used in some other countries.

The Alaska Court of Appeals is an intermediate court of appeals in the State of Alaska's judicial department, created in 1980 by the Alaska Legislature as an additional appellate court to lessen the burden on the Alaska Supreme Court. The court of appeals consists of a chief judge and two associate judges, who are all appointed by the governor of Alaska and face judicial retention elections every eight years; the chief judge of the court of appeals is selected from among the three by the chief justice of the supreme court to serve a two-year term.

The Ontario Court of Justice is a provincial court of record for the Canadian province of Ontario. The court sits at more than 200 locations across the province and oversees matters relating to family law, criminal law, and provincial offences.

The Judicial Appointments Commission(JAC) is an independent commission that selects candidates for judicial office in courts and tribunals in England and Wales and for some tribunals whose jurisdiction extends to Scotland or Northern Ireland.

Colorado Supreme Court the highest court in the U.S. state of Colorado

The Colorado Supreme Court is the highest court in the U.S. state of Colorado. Located in Denver, the Court consists of a Chief Justice and six Associate Justices.

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) is the court of last resort for all criminal matters in the State of Texas, United States. The Court, which is based in the Supreme Court Building in Downtown Austin, is composed of a Presiding Judge and eight judges.

Chuck Poochigian American politician

Charles S. "Chuck" "Pooch" Poochigian is an Associate Justice of the California Court of Appeal and a former California State Senator.

The Tennessee Plan is a system used to appoint and elect appellate court judges in Tennessee. The system required candidates be selected by a nominating commission and therefore plays a significant role in the selection of the state's judiciary. It is largely patterned after the Missouri Plan, and an earlier version in Tennessee was called the Modified Missouri Plan.

The Vermont Supreme Court is the highest judicial authority of the U.S. state of Vermont. Unlike most other states, the Vermont Supreme Court hears appeals directly from the trial courts, as Vermont has no intermediate appeals court.

Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission

The Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission is the judicial nominating commission of the U.S. state of Oklahoma. It selects potential justices and judges for gubernatorial appointments for judges for state appellate courts.

New Mexico Supreme Court the highest court in the U.S. state of New Mexico

The New Mexico Supreme Court is the highest court in the U.S. state of New Mexico. It is established and its powers defined by Article VI of the New Mexico Constitution. It is primarily an appellate court which reviews civil and criminal decisions of New Mexico's trial courts of general jurisdiction and certain specialized legislative courts, only having original jurisdiction in a limited number of actions. It currently resides in the New Mexico Supreme Court Building in Santa Fe.

Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals is one of the two highest judicial bodies in the U.S. state of Oklahoma and is part of the Oklahoma Court System, the judicial branch of the Oklahoma state government.

The Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission, which also serves as the Indiana Judicial Qualifications Commission, is a panel consisting of the Chief Justice of the Indiana Supreme Court and six other members chosen by those admitted to practice law in Indiana and by the Governor of Indiana to select judges to serve on the Indiana Court of Appeals and the Indiana Supreme Court. The commission is part of the Judicial Branch of the state government and reports directly to the state Supreme Court.

The judges of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom include the President, the Deputy President, and Justices of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The Supreme Court is the highest in the whole of the United Kingdom for civil matters, and for criminal matters from the United Kingdom jurisdictions of England and Wales and Northern Ireland. Judges are appointed by the Queen on the advice of the Prime Minister, who receives recommendations from a selection commission. The number of judges is set by s.23(2) Constitutional Reform Act 2005, which established the Court, but may be increased by the Queen through an Order in Council under s.23(3). There are currently 12 positions: one President, one Deputy President, and 10 Justices. Judges of the Court who are not already peers are granted the style Lord or Lady for life.

Judiciary of California

The Judiciary of California is defined under the California Constitution, law, and regulations as part of the Government of California. The judiciary has a hierarchical structure with the Supreme Court at the apex, California courts of appeal as the primary appellate courts, and the California superior courts as the primary trial courts. Its administration is effected by the Judicial Council and its staff, as well as the relatively autonomous courts. California uses a modified Missouri Plan method of appointing judges, whereby judges are nominally elected at the superior court level and appointed at higher levels, and are subject to retention elections.

National Judicial Appointments Commission An Act further to amend the Constitution of India.

National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) was a proposed body which would have been responsible for the appointment and transfer of judges to the higher judiciary in India. The Commission was established by amending the Constitution of India through the ninety-ninth constitution amendment with the Constitution Act, 2014 or 99th Constitutional Amendment Act-2014 passed by the Lok Sabha on 13 August 2014 and by the Rajya Sabha on 14 August 2014. The NJAC would have replaced the collegium system for the appointment of judges as invoked by the Supreme court via judicial fiat by a new system. Along with the Constitution Amendment Act, the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014, was also passed by the Parliament of India to regulate the functions of the National Judicial Appointments Commission. The NJAC Bill and the Constitutional Amendment Bill, was ratified by 16 of the state legislatures in India, and subsequently assented by the President of India Pranab Mukherjee on 31 December 2014. The NJAC Act and the Constitutional Amendment Act came into force from 13 April 2015.

References

  1. ↑ National Center for State Courts, State of California.
  2. ↑ "How are high courts' justices elected in California?", Westwood Pine Press (September 9, 1998), 10B.
  3. ↑ "State Bar Opinion Given On November Ballot Propositions No. 10 and 13", The Placer Herald (July 7, 1960), p. 2.
  4. ↑ "Busterud for Paring State's Constitution", The San Francisco Examiner (January 4, 1961), Sec. I, p. 4.
  5. ↑ Caspar Weinberger, "New Move To Give People More Say In Appointment Of Judges", Redlands Daily Facts (May 19, 1961), p. 10.
  6. ↑ "The Day in Sacramento", Oakland Tribune (February 6, 1963), p. 4.
  7. ↑ John H. Culver, "Politics and the California Plan for Choosing Appellate Judges: A Lesson at Large on Judicial Selection", 66 Judicature 151 (1982-1983).
  8. ↑ Aman McLeod, "The Party on the Bench: Partisanship, Judicial Selection Commissions, and State High-Court Appointments", Justice System Journal (2012), Volume 33, Issue 3, p. 262-274.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.