[EL] today's NY Times editorial on Alabama Supreme Court partisan election

[Richard Winger]

Rick Hasen linked to today's NY Times editorial, "No Way to Choose a Judge", which condemns partisan elections for elections for State Supreme Court members.  I agree with the NY Times.  The impetus for the editorial, as explained in the editorial's first paragraph, is that Roy Moore just won the Republican primary for Alabama Supreme Court Justice, polling over 50% in a 3-candidate field.

However, the NY Times says, "Requiring would-be judges to...raise large sums from special interests eager to influence their decisions seriously damages the efficacy and credibility of the judiciary."

In fairness, since the editorial starts off deploring the victory of Roy Moore, the NY Times ought to have included the point that Moore was vastly outspent by his two primary opponents, and he won anyway.

By the way, the November Alabama ballot will list only Roy Moore on the ballot as the Republican nominee.  Democrats aren't running anyone.  Any chance for an independent or minor party nominee for that office depends on the outcome of a lawsuit pending in US District Court in Alabama, against the state law that demands all minor party and independent petitions were due on March 13.  They required 44,829 valid signatures.  Only Americans Elect submitted a petition.  There is a special 5,000-signature procedure for independent presidential candidates, but not other candidates.

Richard Winger

415-922-9779

PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120316/895413ee/attachment.html>