 | This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page . (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
|
In Pennsylvania, the judiciary is chosen through partisan elections. [1] Partisan elections involve judges political party to be listed on the ballot. [2] The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has not always elected judges through this process.
The first state constitution was created in 1776, shortly after the country declared its independence from Great Britain. [3] After heated debate over the issue, it was decided that the Pennsylvania governor would appoint state judges and justices. They served seven years, and could be replaced at any time for “misbehavior” or “maladministration.” After the seven years, they could be positioned at the same previously-held post, or replaced, depending on the wishes of the governor.
In the age of President Andrew Jackson, there was a movement within the state, and country, that all government positions should be held accountable to the will of the people, i.e. the voters. During a Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention, there were more talks about going to an elected judiciary. [4] However, it did not have enough votes to make any substantial change; the tenure for Supreme Court justices was reduced, though, from life to fifteen years. This would mark the first step in reforming the judiciary within the Commonwealth.
In 1850, members of the General Assembly proposed legislation for an elected judiciary. The “election versus appointment” battle raged on within the state. It would not pass for another twenty years. At the 1872 Constitutional Convention, there was considerable pushback from the advocates of the appointment system. A compromise was reached – the term for Supreme Court Justices was increased from fifteen years to twenty-one years, but it was made illegal to serve more than one term. Therefore, every justice appointed would be for two decades, then replaced.
Almost a century later, at the Constitutional Convention of 1967, the issue erupted again. This time, however, the advocates of judicial elections were far more abundant. The result was to insert in the 1968 primary election a new judicial article which instituted partisan election of judges. [5] The article passed, but critics of judicial elections claimed that the language of the article confused voters. Because of this, there was another statewide vote that spring, in which the results were much closer, but still held that people wanted to elect their judges rather than having the governor appoint them.
As of 2015, the Brennan Center for Justice lists 16 states in which the high court judges are appointed by the governor and reselected in unopposed retention elections, 15 states in which the high court judges are selected in contested nonpartisan elections, and 7 states in which the high court judges are selected in contested partisan elections. [6]
 | This section needs additional citations for verification .(April 2018) |
The judiciary of Pennsylvania can be found in Article V of the State Constitution. [7] It established a pyramid-like structure for courts, closely resembling the federal court system, with three main levels called the Supreme Court, Superior Court, and Commonwealth Court. It states that all courts are to be “united” for the common good.
The highest level is the Supreme Court. This court consists of seven justices with the Chief Justice presiding over the chamber. The middle level of the system is the intermediary appellate courts. Pennsylvania contains two intermediary appellate courts: the Superior Court of Pennsylvania and the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. The Commonwealth Court has jurisdiction over appeals from decisions typically involving state agencies or cases in which the Commonwealth is a party. The Superior Court generally hears most other appeals. Both the Superior and Commonwealth courts are subservient to the Supreme Court. The Superior Court hears cases from across Pennsylvania and because there is only one Superior Court, its holdings apply statewide. The number of courts and judges are established by the Pennsylvania Constitution and law originating from the General Assembly in Harrisburg. The Court of Common Pleas is the court of general jurisdiction over many civil and criminal matters in Pennsylvania.
Before entering the main court system, usually people have to pass through magisterial district courts which are smaller-scale local courts that typically have jurisdiction over traffic citations, preliminary hearings in many criminal matters, and small claims civil cases. Typically, at least one of these exists for every judicial district, if not several depending on the size and population of the county in which the district is located. Alternatively, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh have both established municipal courts — the only municipal courts in Pennsylvania — that function in much the same way as their magisterial district court counterparts.
Before judges and Justices can be elected, they must meet certain basic requirements, such as residency and citizenship. [8] First, all judges (excluding magisterial district judges) have to be a member of the bar of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, which is the mandatory bar for licensed lawyers, not to be confused with the wholly voluntary Pennsylvania Bar Association. Elections occur in odd-numbered years. Every judge can run for reelection until they reach the mandatory retirement age of 75. If there is a vacancy, due to death or retirement, it is filled by gubernatorial appointment until there is another election. For the Supreme Court, Superior Court, Commonwealth Court, and Court of Common Pleas, there is a 10-year term. For magisterial district courts and municipal courts, judges serve a 6-year term. Each aspiring judge runs with their political party listed on the ballot, but after victory the party affiliation is erased from his/her name to prevent political pressures. [9]
Due, among other factors, to Pennsylvania having an overwhelming number of male governors, there were few to no women in the court system. With the change in 1968, however, more women became involved in the judiciary by way of election. [10] The people of Pennsylvania are more likely to elect women to serve as judges and justices than male governors were to appoint them. By the numbers, conservative governors never chose women to be judges, and more liberal ones appointed women about 30% of the time. In recent times, however, more than 28% of judicial seats in the Commonwealth are held by women. [11]
The two main disadvantages often argued to counter the affirmative viewpoint is the palpable corruption within the Pennsylvania judicial system and the problems which arise from integrating politics and law, which the state founders warned against. [12] Three separate judges, all having been elected to the Court of Common Pleas, have been involved in scandals while in office in the past ten years[ when? ] (one term). [13] All have been prosecuted in Federal court, with charges ranging from bribery to the artifice to defraud. [14]
Another problem is the mixing of politics and law. Massive amounts of money are being spent on these races, which reinforces the notion[ according to whom? ] that these positions are actually political and not purely legal. [15] During the 2015 Supreme Court elections, more than $15 million was raised and spent trying to advertise the candidates to the population, despite the low voting rate for judicial elections in the state. [16] Because these candidates run as either Republican or Democrat, they also got help from PACs; in 2008-2009, about $2.9 million was spent by PACs on Supreme Court elections. [17]
There have been many factions in Pennsylvania that continue to push for reverting to an appointment system for judges. The increasing political emphasis on these elections, as well as the cases of corruption, are beginning to convince the population that the old system was both better for the state and more efficient. There are also talks of subsequently increasing term lengths, reducing judge's salaries, requiring more formal education, and abolishing the retirement requirement for age 75. [18]
In the United States, a state supreme court is the highest court in the state judiciary of a U.S. state. On matters of state law, the judgment of a state supreme court is considered final and binding in both state and federal courts.
Judicial independence is the concept that the judiciary should be independent from the other branches of government. That is, courts should not be subject to improper influence from the other branches of government or from private or partisan interests. Judicial independence is important to the idea of separation of powers.
The Missouri Plan is a method for the selection of judges. It originated in Missouri in 1940 and has been adopted by many states of the United States. Similar methods are used in some other countries.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) is the highest court in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Although the claim is disputed by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, the SJC claims the distinction of being the oldest continuously functioning appellate court in the Americas, with a recognized history dating to the establishment of the Massachusetts Superior Court of Judicature in 1692 under the charter of the Province of Massachusetts Bay.
The Supreme Court of the State of Ohio is the highest court in the U.S. state of Ohio, with final authority over interpretations of Ohio law and the Ohio Constitution. The court has seven members, a chief justice and six associate justices, who are elected at large by the voters of Ohio for six-year terms. The court has a total of 1,550 other employees. Since 2004, the court has met in the Thomas J. Moyer Ohio Judicial Center on the east bank of the Scioto River in Downtown Columbus. Prior to 2004, the court met in the James A. Rhodes State Office Tower and earlier in the Judiciary Annex of the Ohio Statehouse.
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is the highest court in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's Unified Judicial System. It also claims to be the oldest appellate court in the United States, a claim that is disputed by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania began in 1684 as the Provincial Court, and casual references to it as the "Supreme Court" of Pennsylvania were made official in 1722 upon its reorganization as an entity separate from the control of the royal governor. Today, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania maintains a discretionary docket, meaning that the Court may choose which cases it accepts, with the exception of mandatory death penalty appeals, and certain appeals from the original jurisdiction of the Commonwealth Court. This discretion allows the Court to wield powerful influence on the formation and interpretation of Pennsylvania law.
The Michigan Supreme Court is the highest court in the U.S. state of Michigan. It is Michigan's court of last resort and consists of seven justices. The Court is located in the Michigan Hall of Justice at 925 Ottawa Street in Lansing, the state capital.
The Supreme Court of Oklahoma is a court of appeal for non-criminal cases, one of the two highest judicial bodies in the U.S. state of Oklahoma, and leads the judiciary of Oklahoma, the judicial branch of the government of Oklahoma.
The Supreme Court of Georgia is the highest judicial authority of the U.S. state of Georgia. The court was established in 1845 as a three-member panel. Since 1896, the justices have been elected by the people of the state. The justices are currently elected in statewide non-partisan elections for six-year terms, with any vacancies filled through an appointment by the Governor.
The Government of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is the governmental structure of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as established by the Pennsylvania Constitution. It is composed of three branches: executive, legislative and judicial. The capital of the Commonwealth is Harrisburg.
The Government of Guam (GovGuam) is a presidential representative democratic system, whereby the President is the head of state and the Governor is head of government, and of a multi-party system. Guam is an organized, unincorporated territory of the United States with policy relations between Guam and the US under the jurisdiction of the Office of Insular Affairs.
The Government of West Virginia is modeled after the Government of the United States, with three branches: the executive, consisting of the Governor of West Virginia and the other elected constitutional officers; the legislative, consisting of the West Virginia Legislature which includes the Senate and the House of Delegates; and the judicial, consisting of the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals and lower courts.
Jack Anthony Panella is a Judge on the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. He is a member of the Democratic Party. Prior to his election to the Superior Court, he was a Judge on the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County, Pennsylvania.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts is governed by a set of political tenets laid down in its state constitution. Legislative power is held by the bicameral General Court, which is composed of the Senate and House of Representatives. The governor exercises executive power with other independently elected officers: the Attorney General, Secretary of the Commonwealth, and Auditor. The state's judicial power rests in the Supreme Judicial Court, which manages its court system. Cities and towns act through local governmental bodies to the extent that they are authorized by the Commonwealth on local issues, including limited home-rule authority. Although most county governments were abolished during the 1990s and 2000s, a handful remain.
The Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania is the unified state court system of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
The Federal Government of Brazil is the national government of the Federative Republic of Brazil, a republic in South America divided in 26 states and a federal district. The Brazilian federal government is divided in three branches: the executive, which is headed by the President and the cabinet; the legislative, whose powers are vested by the Constitution in the National Congress; and the judiciary, whose powers are vested in the Supreme Federal Court and lower federal courts. The seat of the federal government is located in Brasília.
The Judiciary of California or the Judicial Branch of California is defined under the California Constitution as holding the judicial power of the state of California which is vested in the Supreme Court, the Courts of Appeal and the Superior Courts. The judiciary has a hierarchical structure with the California Supreme Court at the top, California Courts of Appeal as the primary appellate courts, and the California Superior Courts as the primary trial courts.
The judiciary of Massachusetts is the branch of the government of Massachusetts that interprets and applies the law of Massachusetts, ensures equal justice under law, and provides a mechanism for dispute resolution. The judicial power in Massachusetts is reposed in the Supreme Judicial Court, which superintends the entire system of courts.
David Norman Wecht is an American attorney and jurist, who has served as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania since 2016. Prior to his election in 2015, Wecht had served as a judge of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
John A. Hutchison is a lawyer and jurist currently serving as the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. He joined the court in 2018 and has served as chief justice since 2022.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)