Introduction
Judicial Selection System
The Connecticut Constitution provides that all judges of the superior, appellate, and supreme courts are appointed by the General Assembly upon nomination by the governor. Each judge is appointed for an eight-year term, and must be renominated and reappointed for additional terms or movement to a higher court. In 1986, the Judicial Selection Commission was established by constitutional amendment to recommend both new candidates and incumbent judges for nomination by the governor. The governor can only nominate persons from the commission lists.
In April 2000, the Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee approved a study of the judicial selection process, specifically focusing on how the legislature carries out its role in the system. The study was prompted in part by the nomination of an incumbent judge for reappointment during the 2000 legislative session, which was the source of considerable controversy.
The controversy originated from a criminal trial the judge presided over in 1995, in which the defendant was acquitted of murder and manslaughter by a jury. Opponents to the judge's reappointment charged that certain decisions he made during the course of the trial, as well as statements he made related to the victim's family's contact with the media, called for the rejection of his reappointment.
In the course of considering the judge's nomination, which was ultimately successful, much debate was generated about appropriate standards of review for the legislature in carrying out its constitutional responsibility for reappointing sitting judges. Concern was raised about whether legislators were overly focusing on one case and substituting their judgments for that of the judge, to the detriment of judicial independence. A central question of this review, necessarily intertwined with the issue of standards, was the adequacy of information available to the legislature to perform its appointment and reappointment function.
A final note: it is important to keep in mind that while one sitting judge in particular ran into controversy during the 2000 session, the judge was reappointed. For a variety of reasons, that case may have been an anomaly. However, it must be said it is always appropriate to question and even criticize decisions made by judges. Being criticized comes with being a judge; the appeals process itself is a type of criticism. And it is to everyone's benefit when questioned decisions are explained. The judiciary, indeed no part of government, should be seen as beyond explanation. The problem is when statements go beyond criticism and become threats to not reappoint judges who have only done their jobs.
This report is divided into five chapters. Chapter I discusses the role of the judiciary in our system of government and offers a brief overview of the Connecticut judiciary. Chapter II describes the historical underpinnings of our current selection process for judges. The actual selection process, broken down by the various actors, is set out in Chapter III. Chapter IV identifies the other methods used by states to select judges. Finally, Chapter V sets out findings and recommendations in three areas: 1) legislative standards; 2) information available to the legislature; and 3) the time frame for legislative action.