The project aims to make
judicial elections more transparent for journalists and researchers by creating online profiles of judges that show campaign contributions, judicial opinions and biographies.
Not exact matches
As an outcome of the
elections, it seems likely that pro-life measures will have a
more difficult time, good
judicial appointments may be stymied and the Bush doctrine of promoting democracy in the Middle East may be abandoned.
A former aide to Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonTrump Jr. met with Gulf adviser who offered help to win
election: report Voters Dems need aren't impressed by anti-waterboarding showboating After year of investigation, Trump can rightly claim some vindication
MORE criticized Sen. Kirsten GillibrandKirsten Elizabeth GillibrandOvernight Health Care — Sponsored by PCMA — Trump hits federally funded clinics with new abortion restrictions Dem senators ask drug companies to list prices in ads Gillibrand to publish children's book about suffragists
MORE on Thursday after the New York Democrat became the first of many senators to join a successful push to force the resignation of Sen. Al FrankenAlan (Al) Stuart Franken100 days after House passage, Gillibrand calls on Senate to act on sexual harassment reform Eric Schneiderman and #MeToo pose challenges for both parties Senate confirms Trump
judicial pick over objections of home - state senator
MORE (D - Minn.).
The stories of judges becoming very wealthy on bribes paid by litigants in
election petitions and other high profile cases have become
more pervasive and in matters of the sanctity of the
judicial process, appearances are at least as important as the substance.
The bottom line is come November voters can do little
more than cross their fingers and hope the winners of county - level and Supreme Court
judicial elections serve in their home county and are assigned to the positions they campaigned to fill.
Judge Your Judges, a project of public radio station WNYC in New York that will focus on enabling voters to make
more knowledgeable decisions about New York
judicial elections.
«They have one of the
more engaging races, and I think it might generate some public interest in
judicial elections.»
Minnesota Lawyer newspaper has much
more on this year's
judicial elections.
Other recent changes have already introduced
more partisanship and money into
judicial elections.
The Justices» questions generally fall along anticipated ideological divides (e.g., the conservative Justices seem to support uninhibited solicitation of campaign contributions and the liberal Justices seem to support
more regulation in
judicial elections).
A now - defeated
judicial elections bill introduced in Hawaii this session was motivated by a trial judge's decision requiring the legislature to allocate
more funds to the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.
It allowed
more campaign cash into North Carolina's
judicial elections by eliminating the popular, nationally - renowned public financing program for
judicial candidates.
JY - In recent decades it has become quite clear that
judicial elections can be ugly affairs with lots of negative campaigning - doesn't this hurt the judiciary's image - making people see them less as esteemed decision makers and
more as politicians in robes?
Spiwack / O» Malley appears to be conceding to a stubborn reality of Chicago
judicial elections: having an Irish woman's name is an extraordinarily valuable commodity at the polls —
more valuable, it seems, than professional experience, skill, or
judicial temperament.
Although we have authority to deflect cases to the Court of Appeals, which relieves much of the load, the
more difficult and complex cases, plus all cases involving constitutional questions, death penalty, first impressions, newly developing law and a whole litany of special subjects (
election contests, utility rates, annexations, bar and
judicial discipline matters, etc.) are assigned to our Court.