A lawsuit challenging how Alaska chooses its judges was thrown out of federal court Friday.

U.S. District Judge John Sedwick issued a brief order from the bench dismissing the suit. He said a written order would follow, likely next week.

The lawsuit claimed lawyers have too much say in picking Alaska judges. It was brought on behalf of Kenneth Kirk, an Anchorage lawyer who has applied for judgeships but never been nominated, as well as two other Alaskans, Michael Miller and Carl Ekstrom, who contend they don't get enough say in the matter.

The state countered that lawyers deserve an elevated role because of their special knowledge and that there's no requirement for judges to be elected or for those involved in selecting judicial candidates to be elected.

Under a system modeled after Missouri's and adopted after the constitutional convention more than 50 years ago, the Alaska Judicial Council nominates at least two candidates from a list of applicants for each open judgeship. The governor makes the appointment from those nominated.

Judges then are listed periodically on the election ballot and either retained or thrown out by voters.

The Alaska Judicial Council includes three lawyers appointed by the Alaska Bar Association board of governors; three non-lawyers appointed by the governor; and the chief justice of the state Supreme Court, currently Walter Carpeneti.

All seven council members were named as defendants in the suit and five of them, including Carpeneti, came to Friday's hearing.

"This is wonderful news," Carpeneti said afterward.

Alaska is one of 28 states that select at least some judges through a nominating commission that forwards names to the governor. And Alaska is among 18 in which some members of the nominating panel are picked by the bar association. But the plaintiffs say that only 10 of those states, including Alaska, require that judges be chosen from the list of nominated candidates.

"In the example of the Judicial Council, the layered system is carefully designed to insulate the judicial selection process from political influence and to allow Alaska to seat impartial and well-qualified judges," said a filing by assistant attorney general, Margaret Paton-Walsh, and Anchorage attorney Jeff Feldman, whose firm is defending the Alaska process for free.

The plaintiffs contend Alaska's system violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by denying plaintiffs an equal vote.

The lead lawyer for the plaintiffs was James Bopp of Indiana, general counsel for the James Madison Center for Free Speech. He has expertise in election law but is also general counsel for the National Right to Life Committee and has made abortion cases a key element of his practice. He has said that Alaska court decisions on abortion were not a factor in filing the lawsuit.

Bopp argued that lawyers on the council shouldn't be able to nominate judicial candidates unless they themselves are appointed to the Judicial Council by someone who is elected, such as the governor, or unless the Alaska Bar Association changes its board to one that is elected.

There's no proof that lawyers are better at choosing judges than everyone else, yet they have a special privilege, he said. Bopp told Sedwick that if his side loses, the bar association could "flat out select all the judges," amassing power like Iranian mullahs.

Sedwick rejected Bopp's hyperbole and told him to stick to what the law actually says.

Feldman argued on behalf of the Alaska Judicial Council, telling Sedwick that lawyers do have special expertise in this area. And the constitutional rule of one-person, one-vote doesn't apply because there's no election at issue, Feldman said.

He quoted a 1997 decision in a federal court challenge to Missouri's system, upon which Alaska modeled its process. In that case, a judge ruled that the nominating commission was "a special unit with narrow functions" and that it was reasonable to have lawyers on the panel and also to have lawyers pick the lawyers who did the nominating.

The Alaska lawsuit also sought to block the judicial council from forwarding names to fill an upcoming vacancy on the Alaska Supreme Court. Justice Robert Eastaugh is retiring Nov. 2.

Bopp suggested to Sedwick that the council could forward names chosen without the votes of the three lawyers.

Sedwick rejected his arguments.

Nineteen people are under consideration for the Supreme Court vacancy and scheduled to be interviewed next month.

Both Kirk and Ken Jacobus, an Anchorage lawyer who helped bring the suit, applied for the last Supreme Court vacancy, filled by Gov. Sarah Palin's appointment of Morgan Christen. Neither Kirk nor Jacobus got a single vote from anyone on the Judicial Council, including the non-lawyer members appointed by Palin and former Gov. Frank Murkowski, said council executive director Larry Cohn.

At any rate, lawyers don't have disproportionate power on the council, according to the state's court filings. Out of more than 700 votes on judicial candidates between 1984 and 2007, the vote only split three-three with lawyers against non-lawyers five times. The chief justice only votes to break a tie, and sided with the non-lawyers in three of those instances. And there haven't been any such splits since then, Cohn said.

Bopp said the plaintiffs would appeal.

Find Lisa Demer online at adn.com/contact/ldemer or call 257-4390.

ADVERTISEMENT