Judicial Selection Criteria | Letter to Judicial Candidates
Sample Questions for Judicial Candidates
Minnesota
State Bar Association
position statement regarding
Exercise of Free Speech by Judicial
Candidates
Approved by the MSBA Assembly on September 17, 2004
On June 27, 2002, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White. The Supreme Court held unconstitutional a provision in the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct that prohibited a candidate for a judicial office from announcing her or his views on disputed legal or political issues. Simply stated, the Court found that such prohibition violated the free speech clause of the First Amendment.
Why had Minnesota enacted this provision? Why does the Minnesota State Bar Association (MSBA) still believe that it is appropriate to limit some speech by judicial candidates?
The MSBA recognizes that judicial candidates enjoy the same right to free speech as does a candidate for any other office. However, judges occupy a unique position in our society, a society governed not by force, but by the rule of law. Laws are enacted by the majority, but their interpretation and application rests with an independent and impartial judiciary. If you have ever looked at the statue of the Goddess of Justice, she is blindfolded to emphasize this very hallmark of our Courts - the just application of the law regardless of the personal biases of those sitting in judgment. This rule of law commands allegiance from society only if it commands respect, and it commands respect only if it is administered openly, with independence, integrity and impartiality. Thus, judicial candidates, while free to speak, should speak in a manner befitting the attributes of independence, integrity and impartiality that we expect of their office.
In 1883 at his inaugural address, the first president of the Minnesota State Bar Association, Gordon Cole, described the legal profession as containing, among other attributes, "the most heroic defenders of human liberty which the world in any age has provided." As the largest organization of attorneys defending your individual liberties in this State, we urge you to require that any judicial candidate you support exercise their right of free speech responsibly, by considering whether their speech is consistent with the core purpose of the office they seek. The core features of our judiciary are independence, integrity and impartiality.
A candidate for judicial office should make no pledges or promises regarding his or her conduct in office, other than to faithfully and impartially perform the required duties. A candidate should not announce his or her views on disputed legal or political issues, nor by words or conduct give any indication of personal bias or prejudice. A candidate should not misrepresent his or her identity, qualifications, or present position, nor those of an opponent.
Exercise your political power this November and VOTE - and when you do
vote, make sure the judicial candidate you support best identifies with
those three hallmarks of justice: independence, integrity and impartiality.
Approved by the MSBA Assembly on September 17, 2004
Selection Criteria. Criteria for the selection of judges should include, but should not necessarily be limited to:
(i)Integrity and Independence. A candidate for the office of judge should be of high moral character and enjoy a general reputation in the community for ethical conduct, honesty and independence from influences that would undermine public confidence in the judiciary.
(ii) Professional Competence. The candidate should exhibit professional competence, as reflected in his or her analytical ability, professional and personal judgment, writing and speaking ability, knowledge of the law, breadth of professional experience, including courtroom experience, and administrative ability.
(iii) Judicial Temperament. The candidate should possess an appropriate judicial temperament, including maturity, courtesy and civility, compassion, decisiveness, collegiality, devotion to public service, commitment to equal justice under the law, and the courage to uphold the independence of the judiciary in the face of political pressure.
(iv) General Characteristics. The candidate should have other characteristics that would assist him or her to fulfill the duties of judicial office, including self-motivation, industry, diligence, capacity for work, mental and physical health as they would affect the candidate's ability to perform the duties of the position, and an ability to work under pressure.
Explanation
(i) Integrity and Independence. A candidate for the office
of judge should be of high moral character and enjoy a general reputation
in the community for ethical conduct, honesty and independence from influences
that would undermine public confidence in the judiciary.
Since judges make decisions that affect lives, it is crucial that they have unquestioned integrity. At the very least, integrity means that the person is intellectually honest, adheres to moral principles, is conscientious and fair. A person of integrity is also sincere, reliable, trustworthy and ethical. Judges should support and follow the law, the Code of Judicial Conduct and the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Public trust and confidence in the judiciary rest on the public's belief that each person will be given a fair hearing in court. Judges have a responsibility to uphold this trust and confidence. They do so by treating cases objectively regardless of the identity of the parties or the subject matter of the controversy. A judge must ignore personal preferences, put aside a tendency to pick sides, disengage from personal and political influences and analyze the facts neutrally and with an open mind. A judge should also convey the impression of fairness to the parties to a controversy, to the attorneys and to other judges so that parties will feel confident that their matters are given full, fair and independent consideration.
(ii) Professional Competence. The candidate should exhibit professional competence, as reflected in his or her analytical ability, professional and personal judgment, writing and speaking ability, knowledge of the law, breadth of professional experience, including courtroom experience, and administrative ability.
"Analytical ability" is the ability to consider abstract matters
in an intelligent manner. In addition to having analytical ability, the
candidate should be able to express his or her decisions in a logical,
understandable manner both orally and in writing. Although trial judges
make both oral and written decisions, most of an appellate judge's time
is spent writing opinions. It is essential that those opinions be organized,
logical and clear.
Trial judges should have strong communication skills. These skills are
important because the judge deals with many individuals in court, including
attorneys and their clients, parties appearing without a lawyer, witnesses,
jurors and visitors. Each of these individuals will have a different level
of understanding of the law and how it relates to the situation at hand.
An effective judge will be able to communicate at the appropriate level
to ensure that everyone understands the judge's comments and decisions.
This is particularly important when a criminal defendant comes to court
without an attorney. That person will need to understand the judge's questions
about whether he or she is eligible for a court-appointed attorney. Strong
communication skills are also important when the judge works with a jury
and must explain the jurors' responsibilities and instruct them in the
law. Appellate judges should have sufficient communication skills to allow
him or her to frame appropriate questions for oral argument and clearly
express his or her thoughts during discussions with appellate lawyers
and judges.
Judges handle a variety of issues in each case before the court, so it
is important for a judge to have a strong working knowledge of different
areas of the law, including procedure (how and when documents and arguments
can be submitted or presented), evidence (what documents and witness testimony
can be accepted and considered by the court), constitutional issues, and
the particular areas of law that apply in each case. The type of legal
experience the candidate has, as well as the number of years he or she
has been active in practice as a lawyer or judge, will have a direct influence
on the person's knowledge of the law. Although it is not necessary that
a judge begin his or her term with an understanding of all areas of the
law, the judge should be a person who is flexible and can learn new subject
areas quickly. It is also helpful for a judge to have had significant
experience trying cases in the courtroom.
In addition to a judge's work in managing the courtroom, the judge will
also have administrative and, sometimes, supervisory responsibilities.
Administrative responsibilities are more capably managed when the judge
is organized, knows how to prioritize tasks, completes work within deadlines
and manages time efficiently. A competent supervisor has good interpersonal
skills and can provide meaningful performance reviews. He or she will
be expected to motivate staff or other judges. If disputes arise or differing
views become apparent within the court system, the judge should be someone
who can work toward compromise.
(iii) Judicial Temperament. The candidate should possess an appropriate judicial temperament, including maturity, courtesy and civility, compassion, decisiveness, collegiality, devotion to public service, commitment to equal justice under the law, and the courage to uphold the independence of the judiciary in the face of political pressure.
Judges are in contact with lawyers, members of the public and court employees on a daily basis. An effective judge possesses an elusive quality called judicial temperament, which defines the nature of the judge's contacts with people. Judicial temperament is found in the person who uses authority gracefully, tactfully and with calm yet firm assurance. A judge should be dignified and recognizes that each case is important to the participants. A candidate does not have the appropriate temperament to be a judge unless he or she possesses great patience.
Another important quality is decisiveness, which is of particular importance to trial judges, but also applies to appellate judges. To keep cases moving, a judge must be willing and able to reach decisions with confidence and without hesitation.
It is important that candidates have a commitment to public service and the community. Judges have the opportunity to enhance the public's view of the court by acting as court liaisons within the community. A judge benefits both the court and the public by publishing articles, teaching and participating in community activities. Another important by-product of community involvement is that it raises the judge's awareness of the problems and concerns of attorneys and of parties to a dispute. At the same time, contact with the court allows community members to become sensitive to the pressures of the court, which will give them a better understanding of the needs of the court. Overall, judges should maintain an awareness of their public role and a devotion to public service.
Appellate judges make decisions collectively, toward a common purpose
to express and develop principles of law. This aspect of the appellate
judge's role demands collegiality, or loyalty to the court as an institution
and as a collection of diverse individuals. A judge must respect differing
views and minimize personality disputes as the court works together toward
compromise. As a part of the art of compromise, a judge must be capable
of both giving appropriate criticism and receiving criticism. A good appellate
judge cares about the quality of the court's decisions as a whole, not
just his or her own opinions. A good appellate judge will not sacrifice
judicial independence by succumbing to political pressures at the expense
of applying existing law.
The same principles of collegiality apply to trial judges during their
involvement with committees along side other judges and attorneys, or
when they interact with professionals and members of the public in court
and in joint community efforts.
Trial judges are called on to make quick decisions under pressure. During trial they must rule on objections as soon as they are raised. Cases should be moved along in a timely manner, and this means that judges should rule promptly on motions to prevent delay. When making these decisions, the judge should be able to quickly identify the essential facts, apply the appropriate law, and respond to issues confidently and without hesitation. Judges must be willing and able to make hard decisions. An appellate judge has a responsibility to act decisively when drafting opinions so there will not be any undue delay in finalizing the court's collective decision. All judges must balance the competing goals of judicial economy and fairness while dispensing impartial justice.
(iv) General Characteristics. The candidate should have other characteristics that would assist him or her to fulfill the duties of judicial office, including self-motivation, industry, diligence, capacity for work, mental and physical health as they would affect the candidate's ability to perform the duties of the position, and the ability to work under pressure.
Judges in the trial and appellate courts are subject to increasing demands on their time and energy due to high caseloads and backlogged calendars. An industrious judge is more capable of dealing with those pressures while meeting applicable deadlines. There are many work habits that comprise the quality of industry, including the willingness to devote time to the completion of tasks and the self-motivation to undertake those tasks in a timely manner. Diligence is also required. Diligence involves steady devotion to the completion of matters. In addition, a judge who is punctual and prepared retains the public's confidence in the administration of justice.
A candidate should be physically and mentally healthy to achieve the high level of performance demanded of a judge. The following list illustrates some of the essential functions judges are called upon to conduct, and a candidate should possess the ability to perform them:
* Evaluate the credibility of witnesses;
* Make factual determinations from competing presentations;
* Make decisions in a timely fashion;
* Facilitate, to the extent practicable, communication between the parties
and their attorneys, and the court, to narrow or define those issues to
which there are genuine factual disputes that must be tried, and to define
the legal issues remaining for the court;
* Serve in a fair, impartial, and unbiased manner;
* Communicate, orally and in writing, in an articulate and logical manner;
* Demonstrate honesty, integrity, patience, open-mindedness, courtesy,
tact, compassion, and humility in performing judicial functions;
* Exercise control over court proceedings; and
* Perform the above functions consistently and on a full-time basis.
A candidate for judicial office must possess the qualities that will assure the delivery of impartial, effective, and efficient judicial services to the public he or she would serve. An industrious judge must be able to balance and leverage judicial tasks to assure that justice is administered in a world of finite public resources, without sacrificing the hallmarks of justice - independence, integrity, and impartiality -in the process.
Election season is upon us and once again we have the opportunity to experience our democracy working at its best at the national, state and local levels. Minnesota’s judicial elections include eleven contested races with four at the appellate level and seven at the district court level. As President of the Minnesota State Bar Association, I write to ask you as members of the bar and candidates for judicial office to conduct your judicial campaigns in a manner that preserves the independence of the Minnesota judiciary and maintains Minnesota’s national reputation for competence, impartiality and independence.
An independent judiciary is crucial to the preservation of our constitutional system of checks and balances. Candidates for judicial office have the opportunity to educate voters to understand how judicial elections differ from legislative and executive branch elections. Judges are different from other public officials. Judges have no constituencies and they make decisions based on the rule of law, not popular opinion. Judicial candidates must model behavior that reflects the impartiality and independence required of the judge in our society. Judicial candidates must explain to the voters why they are prohibited from committing themselves in advance to issues that are likely to come before their courts.
As candidates for judicial office you have the opportunity to conduct your campaigns in a manner that enhances the public’s trust and confidence in our justice system. The messages you give throughout your campaign will directly impact whether the judiciary is perceived to be impartial. As we know, the qualities of a good judge are not to be determined by the electorate but by a candidate’s intellect, character, and sound judgment. As a public servant, a judge is valued for a capacity to discern and make difficult decisions following the rule of law independent of the judge’s personal and political beliefs.
I ask that you commit your campaigns to furthering the public’s understanding of our democracy and an independent judiciary.
Sincerely,
David Stowman
MSBA President
MSBA
Judicial Elections Committee
September 17, 2004
Sample Questions for Judicial Candidates
GENERAL QUESTIONS
1. What do you consider to be the relevant qualifications for a judge
and how do you meet those qualifications?
2. What do you consider your general judicial philosophy?
3. Why should voters support you rather than your opponent?
4. Are there any existing or potential obstacles to your appointment/election?
5. Do you possess any expertise in a field other than law?
KNOWLEDGE / EXPERIENCE
1. To what extent have you practiced in the area of criminal law? Family
law? Civil litigation?
2. What is the most difficult problem facing the court in your judicial
district?
3. How does your past experience qualify you to be a judge?
4. Do you believe the composition of juries adequately and fairly reflects
society at large? Why or why not? If not, what can we do to change this?
5. How could the costs of judicial administration be reduced? Can you
give us a specific example of how you have reduced costs in your law practice/court?
6. What have been the most effective methods for improving court procedures
and efficiency? What other methods would you suggest?
7. What do you perceive as the greatest obstacles to justice, if any?
8. Is a judge required to report attorney misconduct in the courtroom?
9. Do you believe there is under-representation of women or people of
color in the court system? If so, how would you work to correct the problem?
10. Do you believe that all citizens have adequate access to legal help
and the legal system? How can wider and better access be provided?
11. What are the pros and cons of alternative dispute resolution?
12. Is there a need for more mandatory mediation and settlement efforts?
What specifically do you propose to do about this if elected?
13. What are your views on whether the court, as a whole, deals effectively
with racial and gender bias?
14. What are your views on the need for more diversity on the bench and
the manner in which the court treats members of different races?
15. What are the issues regarding alternative sentences for non-violent
offenders?
16. Do you think the court system is working or do you believe the civil
or criminal justice system is breaking down?
17. What types of clients have you represented while you have been an
attorney?
Character
1. Why do you want to be a judge?
2. Do you ever wake up in the middle of the night, thinking about a case,
wishing you had handled something differently? If so, please describe
one situation.
3. Please describe one instance in which you faced an ethical dilemma
and how you resolved it.
4. What kind of jobs, interests, or volunteer activities did you pursue
during school and law school?
5. Do you believe that voluntary professional and community service is
a necessary commitment for persons holding public office? What forms of
voluntary professional and community service have you been involved with
in the past? Currently?
6. As a prospective judge, what do you consider your greatest strengths?
Weaknesses?
7. What has been your greatest accomplishment in your legal career? In
your personal life?
8. What are the major influences in your life? Why?
9. What injustices have you witnessed in or outside the courtroom and
what was your response to those events?
10. Have you ever been disciplined by the lawyer's board or the state
board on judicial conduct?
11. Who are your judicial role models? Why?
Judicial Temperament
1. How do you deal with difficult people, including peers, lawyers, clients
or litigants?
2. Describe the atmosphere you want to create in the courtroom and how
you would create this type of atmosphere.
3. When presented with a highly charged courtroom situation in which the
parties or the gallery are emotionally charged, offended or angered, how
would you defuse the situation and maintain order?
4. How would/do you deal with a pro se party appearing in your court?
5. Please describe your administrative experience. What are your primary
strengths as a supervisor? As an administrator?
6. If you observed a party in your courtroom being poorly represented
by an unprepared or ineffective lawyer, how would you handle the situation?
7. Do you believe you would encounter any problems moving from your role
as an advocate to a new role as a judge? (for non-incumbents)
8. While serving on the bench, do you believe you have a role in bringing
important issues concerning legal or judicial administration before the
public or the legislature? Why or why not? What should your role be?
9. What is your vision for the future of our judicial system? What changes
would you advocate and why?
10. Do judges have an obligation to improve public understanding of the
courts? If so, how should they carry out that obligation?