How state judges are selected in Texas

at
Categories
Tags

 

 

 

 

 

 

How are state judges selected in Texas? Discuss two different methods used in
other states for selecting judges. What are the arguments for each of the selection
methods you discussed? Do you think that judges should be elected or appointed?
Explain your reasoning. How informed do you think the public is about judicial elections
and judicial candidates? If you were voting for a judge, would you research the
candidates and their qualifications or would you vote based on party affiliation?

 

Sample Solution

How state judges are selected in Texas

Currently, Texas is one of six states that requires judicial selection for all judicial offices by partisan elections. However, the Texas Constitution allows for appointment by the Governor or county officials and confirmation by the Senate for interim court vacancies. There are two primary methods of judicial selection: election and appointment. Some states provide only for election of judges; most opt for a hybrid of elective and appointive positions. Currently, 33 states (including New York) and the District of Columbia choose at least some of their judges via the appointive process known as merit selection. Election, of course, is just what it sounds like: candidates run in partisan campaigns, and the voters choose their judges in ordinary elections.

National Youth Screening and Assessment Project, may also be available to support implementation. c. DJS should consider amending its practice of screening all youth who appear at the BCJJC for detention admission using the Detention Risk Assessment Instrument, even youth who will ultimately be diverted prior to DJS referral through the BPD Diversion Program. This will limit young people’s exposure to the detrimental impact and collateral consequences associated with generating unnecessary DJS and court records. d. BPD should develop a training and messaging strategy to increase officer knowledge and understanding of new policies and protocols for interacting with youth, the purpose of the juvenile court system, details of juvenile justice process, and the purpose of secure detention. Clear and consistent messaging for officers will help to mitigate the obdurate frustration that officers reportedly experience when they perceive that young people are not being held accountable by the system. e. Conduct a case processing analysis of adult-charged youth in detention to identify why time spent in detention for these youth has doubled from 2014 to 2018 and develop policies and programs to address the causes of delays. 2. Programs and Conditions a. The City should partner closely with DJS and the Baltimore JDAI Oversight Board to assess the continuum of Secure Detention Alternative established by DJS and the extent to which it meets existing needs. b. The City and its appropriate offices and agencies should partner with DJS to identify additional programs for youth in detention, in particular youth charged as adults, that can help young people build skills and connections that will help them succeed following release and return to their communities. c. To the extent that there are gaps in the existing Secure Detention Alternatives Continuum, the City and DJS should partner closely to identify resources to enhance the Alternative Continuum. As a resource, stakeholders should consult the results of the Youth Service Provider Survey conducted as part of this assessment. 3. Community Engagement and Partnerships

This question has been answered.

Get Answer