Friday, May 16, 1997

Step forward in selecting our appeals judges

After much wrangling over how to improve the way Texas chooses its appeals court judges, the House has given initial approval to a bill that would keep the elective process but remove the taint of partisan politics.

Under the measure approved Wednesday by the most narrow of margins in a 67-66 House vote, candidates for the Texas Supreme Court, the Court of Criminal Appeals and the 14 state appeals courts would still be elected, but in non-partisan contests.

That is, these judicial candidates would no longer run in party primaries or with a party affiliation attached to their names on the ballot. The non-partisan elections would be held in November with runoffs, if necessary, in December.

While this stops short of the full judicial selection reform we need, it nevertheless represents a tremendous improvement.

Treating the state's top judges as politicians by making them choose one party over another and run in expensive and often divisive partisan races is an insult to the concept of fair and impartial justice.

Under the present system that forces judges into primary campaigns and partisan elections, a candidate's choice of party carries more weight with voters than judicial qualifications. The opposite should be the case. Neither political party has a lock on justice in Texas.

Looking at individuals

An even better method of guaranteeing the best judges would be for the governor to appoint them and the Texas Senate to approve them. But if we're going to keep those choices in the hands of voters, then removing unnecessary party labels is the best way to encourage voters to examine the qualifications of individuals rather than punching straight party tickets.

The House should give its final approval to this bill, and the Texas Senate should follow suit. Our judges need to be as removed from the realm of political influence as possible, not required to immerse themselves in it.