| dc.description.abstract |
In the lead-up to the 2008 presidential election, the American BarAssociation (ABA), among others, called upon the next president toreform the federal judicial selection process by using bipartisancommissions to screen and recommend Article III candidates forpresidential nomination and Senate confirmation below the SupremeCourt level. This proposal may well find support in the Obamaadministration, given the new president’s emphasis on bipartisanconsensus-building and transparency of government operations. ThisArticle addresses one question that the ABA and others have not: Shouldcurrently serving judges participate in bi-partisan commissions to screenand recommend Article III candidates below the Supreme Court level,just as judges commonly do for state court, other federal court, and othernations’ court appointments? This Article answers “no.”Judges should not serve on Article III screening commissionsbecause the harms of doing so outweigh any potential benefits. Morespecifically, judicial service on Article III screening commissions raisesconcerns principally for: (1) undue accretion of power by judges andattendant threats to judicial integrity and impartiality; and (2) negativeimpacts on bench diversity. These concerns are explored in thediscussion that follows.In the lead-up to the 2008 presidential election, the American Bar Association (ABA), among others, called upon the next president toreform the federal judicial selection process by using bipartisancommissions to screen and recommend Article III candidates forpresidential nomination and Senate confirmation below the SupremeCourt level. This proposal may well find support in the Obamaadministration, given the new president’s emphasis on bipartisan consensus-building and transparency of government operations. ThisArticle addresses one question that the ABA and others have not: Shouldcurrently serving judges participate in bi-partisan commissions to screenand recommend Article III candidates below the Supreme Court level,just as judges commonly do for state court, other federal court, and othernations’ court appointments? This Article answers “no.”Judges should not serve on Article III screening commissionsbecause the harms of doing so outweigh any potential benefits. Morespecifically, judicial service on Article III screening commissions raisesconcerns principally for: (1) undue accretion of power by judges andattendant threats to judicial integrity and impartiality; and (2) negativeimpacts on bench diversity. These concerns are explored in thediscussion that follows. |
