Alaska News

Our view: Judicial challenge

It didn't take federal Judge John Sedwick long to dispense with the lawsuit challenging the system set by the Alaska Constitution for selecting state judges. He dismissed the suit Friday at a hearing, with a written order to follow. A ruling like that, coming barely two months after conservative activists brought the case, is the equivalent of a first-round knockout.

And it came with good reason.

Alaska's selection process is similar to merit systems used to pick judges in more than two dozen states. Federal courts have never thrown out a state's merit selection process, according to Alaska Judicial Council director Larry Cohn.

Alaska's system of picking judges offers a good balance of public input and legal expertise. Most lawyers are eligible to apply for any vacancy. Candidates are reviewed by a panel with three lawyers, three nonlawyer public members appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Legislature, plus the chief justice of the Alaska Supreme Court.

Using surveys of lawyers, jurors and peace and probation officers, along with questionnaires and interviews, the Alaska Judicial Council forwards at least two qualified nominees to the governor, who makes the final choice. After judges are appointed, voters have the power to remove them at periodic retention elections.

The suit claimed that the three lawyers are involved in a way that gives them too much say without being accountable to the public. The lawyer members are picked by the professional lawyers' association for Alaska, not by the governor, an official elected by the public.

But the suit overlooked the fact that Alaskans gave their consent to this judicial selection arrangement from day one. Alaskans approved it when they approved the Alaska Constitution in a statewide vote.

ADVERTISEMENT

In the past 20 years, in assessing more than 800 judicial applicants, the four lawyers on the panel (including the chief justice) outvoted the three public members only twice, according to Cohn. Three times, the chief justice sided with the public members against the three other lawyers, Cohn said.

Alaska's system is designed to minimize the role of politics in picking judges. If the conservatives' lawsuit succeeded, it would make the process far more political. In this case, conservative critics of the Alaska Constitution were asking a federal judge to play the "activist" role that conservatives usually decry.

If federal courts are going to dictate how states must select judges, here's a more appropriate target: They should be looking at states where judges have to run for election and solicit campaign cash from the very lawyers and special interests they will see in their courtrooms.

BOTTOM LINE: This lawsuit met its just fate in federal court.

ADVERTISEMENT