added montana justices to judge count and percentage in supreme court section
← Older revision
Revision as of 08:39, 11 October 2012
(One intermediate revision by one user not shown)
Line 5:
Line 5:
==Supreme Courts==
==Supreme Courts==
−
'''
Seven
states''' elect their [[State Supreme Court justices|Supreme Court justices]] in partisan elections.
+
'''
Eight
states''' elect their [[State Supreme Court justices|Supreme Court justices]] in partisan elections.
Those states are:
Those states are:
Line 11:
Line 11:
* [[Illinois]]
* [[Illinois]]
* [[Louisiana]]
* [[Louisiana]]
+
* [[Montana]]
* [[New Mexico]]
* [[New Mexico]]
* [[Pennsylvania]]
* [[Pennsylvania]]
Line 16:
Line 17:
* [[West Virginia]]
* [[West Virginia]]
−
Altogether,
fifty
-
eight
state high court justices (eighteen in Texas alone) are elected to office in partisan elections, which is about
17
% of all [[State Supreme Court justices|338 state supreme court justices]].
+
Altogether,
sixty
-
five
state high court justices (eighteen in Texas alone) are elected to office in partisan elections, which is about
19
% of all [[State Supreme Court justices|338 state supreme court justices]].
−
Two additional states, Michigan and Ohio, have an electoral process that includes partisan and [[non-partisan election of judges|non-partisan]] elements. In Ohio, candidates for the [[Ohio Supreme Court elections|Ohio general election]] are chosen in partisan primaries; once chosen in this partisan fashion, no party affiliation is listed by candidates' names on the general election ballot. Candidates for the [[Michigan Supreme Court]] are nominated at party conventions, which means that they are chosen in a partisan fashion. However, no partisan affiliation is listed by their name as it appears on the ballot.
+
Two additional states,
[[
Michigan
]]
and
[[
Ohio
]]
, have an electoral process that includes partisan and [[non-partisan election of judges|non-partisan]] elements. In Ohio, candidates for the [[Ohio Supreme Court elections|Ohio general election]] are chosen in partisan primaries; once chosen in this partisan fashion, no party affiliation is listed by candidates' names on the general election ballot. Candidates for the [[Michigan Supreme Court]] are nominated at party conventions, which means that they are chosen in a partisan fashion. However, no partisan affiliation is listed by their name as it appears on the ballot.
If these justices are added in the total percentage of state Supreme Court candidates elected on party line, the total is about 21%, or 72 out of 338 justices.
If these justices are added in the total percentage of state Supreme Court candidates elected on party line, the total is about 21%, or 72 out of 338 justices.
Line 50:
Line 51:
There are 114 levels of trial courts across the nation; for example, the State of Washington has two levels of trial courts, the [[Washington Superior Court]] and [[Washington District Courts]]. Serving on these courts are over 16,000 judges, who are elected in a myriad of ways.
There are 114 levels of trial courts across the nation; for example, the State of Washington has two levels of trial courts, the [[Washington Superior Court]] and [[Washington District Courts]]. Serving on these courts are over 16,000 judges, who are elected in a myriad of ways.
−
By state, many more state trial court judges participate in partisan elections than appellate court judges. While only
seven
states hold partisan elections for appellate judges, in '''
eighteen
states trial court judges participate in partisan elections'''.
+
By state, many more state trial court judges participate in partisan elections than appellate court judges. While only
eight
states hold partisan elections for appellate judges, in '''
nineteen
states trial court judges participate in partisan elections'''.
===States with partisan elections for all trial courts===
===States with partisan elections for all trial courts===
−
Of those eighteen states, in
eight
trial court judges at all levels of the courts participate in partisan elections. Those are:
+
Of those eighteen states, in
ninth
trial court judges at all levels of the courts participate in partisan elections. Those are:
−
*[[Alabama]]
+
* [[Alabama]]
−
*[[Illinois]]
+
* [[Illinois]]
−
*[[Louisiana]]
+
* [[Louisiana]]
−
*[[New Mexico]]
+
* [[Montana]]
−
*[[Pennsylvania]]
+
* [[New Mexico]]
−
*[[Tennessee]]
+
* [[Pennsylvania]]
−
*[[Texas]]
+
* [[Tennessee]]
−
*[[West Virginia]]
+
* [[Texas]]
+
* [[West Virginia]]
Notably, almost all of these states also hold partisan elections for the appellate courts.
Notably, almost all of these states also hold partisan elections for the appellate courts.
Line 88:
Line 90:
*[[New York]]: All trial court judges participate in partisan elections, which the exception of those serving on the [[New York Family Courts]].
*[[New York]]: All trial court judges participate in partisan elections, which the exception of those serving on the [[New York Family Courts]].
+
+
===Montana changes from non-partisan to partisan===
+
On [[c2012|September 17, 2012]], the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit|9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals]] struck down [[Montana|Montana's]] [[non-partisan election of judges|non-partisan election system]], finding it to be unconstitutional. Political parties are now legally able to support or oppose judicial candidates in [[Montana]]. The state has not yet decided whether to appeal the court's decision.
[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/montanas-ban-political-endorsements-judicial_n_1895318.html?utm_hp_ref=politics ''The Huffington Post,'' "Montana Nonpartisan Judicial Elections System Struck Down By Appeals Court," September 18, 2012]
==See also==
==See also==