By Justice Sandra Day O'Connor

Reflections on Arizona’s Judicial Selection Process

January 2008

Reflections on Arizona’s Judicial Selection Process
ITEM DETAILS
Type: Law review article
Source: Ariz. L. Rev.
Citation: 50 Ariz. L. Rev. 15 (2008)
Notes: Date is approximate

Other pages in the O'Connor Institute Online Archive mentioned in this article:

NAME / TITLETYPE
RonNell A. JonesLaw Clerk

Article Text

(Excerpt)

REFLECTIONS ON ARIZONA'S JUDICIAL SELECTION PROCESS

Sandra Day O'Connor* & RonNell Andersen Jones**

Using Arizona as a case study, this Essay examines the history of changes in state judicial-selection rationales, methods, and practices. It outlines Arizona's journey from contested elections to a hybrid merit-selection system featuring appointments and retention elections, and compares this experience to that of states that have continued with a pure election system. The Essay explores the purported tension between judicial accountability and judicial independence and argues that Arizona's experience demonstrates both the falsity of that dichotomy and the superiority of a hybrid merit-selection system in simultaneously promoting accountability, independence, competency, and fairness.

INTRODUCTION

This 50th Anniversary Issue of the Arizona Law Review presents a wonderful opportunity to look back at some remarkable legal developments of the latter half of the twentieth century and the issues that have impacted the work of the judicial branch during that time. One important development is a shift in the issues surrounding the judicial selection process. This trend is particularly notable at the state level because selection processes in the states are easier to change, interest has historically been much lower, and more litigation takes place at the state level than in the federal judicial system.1 Judicial selection methods and the practices surrounding them have a great impact

© COPYRIGHT NOTICE: This Speech / Interview / Article by Justice O'Connor constitutes copyrighted material. The excerpt above is provided here for research purposes only under the terms of fair use (17 U.S.C. § 107). To view the complete original, please visit Heinonline.org.