The judicial system in Virginia consists of three levels which include limited, trial, and the appellate jurisdiction courts. These three levels include such courts as the Supreme Court, the Circuit courts, The Court of Appeal, the juvenile and domestic relations courts, and the general district courts. Seven justices, who serve for a 12-year term, are in charge of the Virginia Supreme Court. There are 11 judges in the Court of Appeal who serve for terms of eight years. The judges for the other lower courts serve for terms of six years.
In Virginia, judges are selected by a legislative elections process. This process can be initiated when the General Assembly creates a new seat or when a vacancy occurs. The courts advise the General Assembly whether a vacancy needs to be filled or created based on caseloads. Once a vacancy is announced, the Senate and House Committees for Courts and Justice begin the process of receiving nominations from the General Assembly members. The General Assembly members submit names of potential candidates to the senate and House Committees for Courts and Justice. The Committee is then given the task of vetting individual candidates to verify their qualifications. These hearings are open to the public who can also contribute to the vetting process. The Committee then prepares a report of the qualified candidates and submits it to each house of the General Assembly. The senate and the House of Delegates then start a separate voting process where the candidate that receives the most votes from each house is elected to the vacant judgeship seat. Seating judges that were also selected for vetting also undergo the same process. The Governor does not have a role to play in this process. However, in the months that the General assembly is not in session, the Governor has the powers to fill vacancies in vacancies occurring in the circuits and appellate courts. District court judges can be appointed by circuit courts in such a scenario. Nevertheless, these appoints will be subject to legislative election when the general assembly resumes its sessions (Heard, 2013).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Judicial Selection Process in Maryland
In Maryland, the judicial system consists of different types of courts which include courts of special appeal, courts of appeal, trial courts of limited jurisdiction, and circuit courts. In this state, the Governor is the appointing authority for judges. However, these appointments are subject to the confirmation by the senate with the exception of the circuit court judges. The Governors have the executive powers of creating commissions of nominating and recommending candidates for appointments. The appellate judges can keep their position through the process of retention elections. However, circuit court judges are required to contest in elections which are nonpartisan. They run the elections as non-opposed candidates. Taking cognizant of the advice or consent of the Senate, the Governor has the powers to appoint a judge to the District Court in the event the seat falls vacant. The appointed judge may take office before the confirmation by the senate but upon the verification of his/her qualifications. However, he/she may cease to hold that office when the General assembly closes its annual session if he/she has not been confirmed by the senate during that time. His term of office is pegged at 10 years. If his term of office expires before he attains the age of 70, he may still be reappointed by the Governor with the consent of the senate for another 10-year term or until he attains the age of 70, whichever comes first.
The selection of circuit court judges occurs when a vacancy results due to removal resignation, death, disqualification as a result of age, or the expiring of a circuit judge’s 15-year term. The Governor then seeks a replacement to fill that office. The appointee then fills that vacancy until the qualification or election of a successor. The election of a successor is done at the first biennial general election for Representatives in Congress after the expiration of the 15-year term or the first election if the vacancy was created through any other way other than expiration. The judge is required to run in a contested election in which anybody who meets the constitutional requirements can run. The circuit courts judges are nominated by the two main political parties in primary elections. However, the candidates can register their candidacies in both political parties to appear in both primaries. The candidate who gets the most votes in both parties proceeds for the general election ballot where the names will appear without any affiliation to any political party.
The appointment process to screen candidates for the appellate and trial courts in Maryland is done by the respective nomination commissions. The appellate nomination commission recommends candidates to fill vacancies that have occurred in the Court of Appeals or in The Court of Special Appeals. This commission has 17 members of which 12 of them are appointed by the Governor, and the remaining 5 submitted to the President of the Maryland State bar Association. The Trial Courts Judicial Nomination Commission consists of 13 members, of which 9 of them are appointed by the Governor, and the remaining 4 are submitted by the president of the bar association. The governor designates the chair of each of these commissions. Any member of the commission cannot be nominated for any judicial vacancy during his term in the commission. When a vacancy occurs the appropriate commission is notified by the Administrative Office of the Courts which then initiates the commission process. The commission is required to seek qualified applicants and review all applications submitted. However, this can only be done if a) the governor has not reappointed a sitting judge to fill the position or, b) appoints any other person from a list of candidates. The vacancy is re-advertised by the commission if less than three candidates apply for the position (Department of Legislative Services, 2015).
Judge Qualifications for Virginia and Maryland
The most notable feature about Virginia regarding the qualifications of a judge is that the selection is done through legislative elections. This is in sharp contrast to the process in Maryland where judges are selected using primary and general elections. The justices of the Supreme Court in Virginia are chosen by majority votes by elected members of the General Assembly of the two Houses. The same process also applies to judges of all the other courts of record. However, in situations where the General Assembly is not in session the Governor of the Commonwealth is given executive powers to appoint someone to fill the vacancy on an interim basis until thirty days after the General Assembly resumes its sessions. In case the general Assembly elects the governor’s appointee s or she is allowed to begin a full term in office. In Maryland, on the other hand, the appointment of Court of Appeal and Trial court judges is done by nomination commissions where a majority of members are appointed by the Governor.
In Virginia, the candidate for a judicial post must be a resident of the state and should also be a lawyer who has been admitted to the Virginia bar for period of over five years before he or she is allowed to become a judge. The same requirements also apply in the state of Maryland. However, unlike in Maryland, justices of the Supreme Court in Virginia serve for a term of 12 years while those of circuit courts and Court of Appeals serve for 8 years. The term of office for justices in the Supreme court in Maryland serve for 10 years a term that can be extended if the office bearer has not attained the age of 70 at the expiration if his or her term. However, in Virginia this particular practice can be done but it is not guaranteed. The retirement age for judges in Virginia is now pegged at 73 years.
Removal of Judges from Office
The removal of judges from office may be due to several factors. This may be due to instances such as judicial misconduct, serious mental or physical disability. In most cases the procedure used is that of impeachment when a judge has been found culpable to have engaged in judicial misconduct. Generally, the impeachment process follows two steps. In many states, the House of Representatives wields the power impeach while the Senate has executive powers of conducting a trial to ascertain whether the removal of a judge is appropriate or not. A simple majority vote in the House of Representatives is enough to impeach a judge. Nevertheless, the removal of a judge from office requires that he should first undergo a trial where a vote of conviction in the Senate should attain the threshold of a two third majority. This procedure is similar in almost all states which require a majority vote of the Lower House and a two-thirds majority in the Upper House.
In Virginia, there is the institution known as the Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission which is mandated to investigate all allegations of serious mental or physical health including judicial misconduct of judges. It has the power to investigate the judges of all courts including the Justices of the Supreme Court as well as substitute judges, the Virginia Workers Compensation Commission, and retired judges recalled back to service. This commission collaborates with the Supreme Court and files complaints against judges who violates judicial conduct or those who engage in judicial misconduct. This commission consists of seven members serving four-year terms and who are elected by the General Assembly. The members of this commission include one general district court judge, two lawyers, one circuit court judge, one juvenile and domestic relations judge, and two members of the public who are not in the legal field. The staff of the commissions receives and investigates cases of misconduct and allegations of violations and presents their findings to the body.
The Judicial Selection Process
In comparison to Maryland, Virginia happens to have a flawed selection process. The main reason being that its system of electing judges is largely influenced by legislators and lacks some form of merit. The potential candidates are initially endorsed by the local members of the General Assembly before reporting to the Courts of Justice Committee to be vetted. This vetting process is only used as a formality and are, in most cases, certified as being qualified to act as judges. After certification, the candidates are then approved by a simple majority by both Houses. This is a flawed and politically influenced selection process that lacks merit. It is a system that is purely based on political connections and networks which leads to impropriety.
The local delegation that endorses potential candidates consists of a group of attorneys who are partly legislators and this raises issues of conflict of interest. This is because the local attorneys have a vested interest which borders on maintaining the political status quo and do not necessarily consider merit as a basis for their selection. The selection process is usually done in closed door sessions which make the process to lack transparency which should consider public participation. The public are the direct consumers of judicial service and need to have a stake in the selection process. The process, therefore, suppresses their voices. The closed door sessions usually lock out the public, a process that is not lawful because judges are public servants. It is, therefore, important for the public to be in the know on what grounds a judge is selected.
There is also the issue of the age limit of judges. It is common knowledge that the removal of a judge is nearly impossible and that a retired judge can serve pro tempore. However, in Virginia, the judges are not subjected to term limits as other public servants like the president or even governors. This is a situation that amounts to a lifetime appointment. There needs to be a term limit and a mandatory retirement age for all judges.
Another issue is with regards to the verification of judicial applications. In Virginia, there is no known system where the applications of the judicial candidates are verified. There have been cases where applicants lie in their applications. This is an unacceptable practice because it goes a long way in showing how opaque the selection process in Virginia is. In democracies such as the United States even big companies are known to be transparent by requiring things such as background checks, credit checks, drug tests, and employment verifications for them to hire new personnel. This is the type of process that potential judges should undergo before they are appointed.
Last but not least, there is no uniformity in the way judges are selected in Virginia. The use of the Judicial Performance evaluation is rarely done. This is a requirement of the law which is often ignored in the selection of judges. This instrument should be used as a source of information in the selection process to make it more effective. The irregularity in such a process is also unfair to other candidates who take it while others bypass it. The current judicial selection system in Virginia has resulted into many problems within the judiciary (Haring, 2009).
In this respect, it will be fair to say that Maryland has a better judicial selection process because its system is highly democratic and transparent. Potential judicial candidates have to face each other in primary and general elections for them to be appointed as judges. The system also involves public participation in elections and even the selection process. It is a more transparent system and one that is based on merit.
References
Department of Legislative Services. (2015). Selection and Retention of Judges. Retrieved From: http://dls.maryland.gov/pubs/prod/CourtCrimCivil/Selection-and-Retention-of-Judges-2015.pdf
Haring, E. (2009). Judicial Selection in Virginia: An Inherently Flawed Process. Jefferson Policy Journal . Retrieved from: http://www.jeffersonpolicyjournal.com/judicial-selection-in-virginia-an-inherently-flawed-process/
Heard, S. (2013). Judicial Selection Overview. Commonwealth of Virginia, Division Of Legislative Services . Retrieved from: http://dls.virginia.gov/judicial.html
