NEW POLITICS OF JUDICIAL SELECTION IN FLORIDA: MERIT SELECTION REDEFINED*, THE

This research examines the impact of legislative changes to Florida's merit selection proces designed to provide the governor with more influence above the judicial selection process. We ask whether the modifications had their intended issue Gubernatorial appointments from 1999 [i]or[/i] part of to the other 2003 to the state's trial courts in the metropolitan areas and to the intermediate court of appeals were analyzed. We find significant differences in appointments before and after the law's change with look up to to political party, and more sophistical trends in the individuals' applications with think highly of to religion and the reporting of religious activity and change conservatism.

"To the victor belong the spoils," and when the victor masterys two of the three branches of state conduct the third branch, especially if it is the judiciary of the State of Florida, would be wise to take note. Republicans, who twist ed control of electoral politics from Democrats in several states above the past decade, have lay the foundation of that winning the governors' mansions and securing majorities in state legislatures did not guarantee consummate implementation of their political agenda. In many states, Republicans have continued to be frustrated by the agency of their predecessors' more liberal ideology, which exists in the sitting justices and the entrenched judicial selection processe that bring them there.

This has been especially real in Florida since 1998, when Republicans gained mastery of the state legislature and executive branch. The litigation during the 2000 presidential election and the Terri Schiavo case in 2005 brought national attention to the antagonistic relationship between Florida's courts and its pitch uponed policymakers, but less visible conflicts have repeatedly occurr when Republican legislative initiatives have been obstructed or delayed by the courts. Among the areas in which court decisions have frustrated Republican policy are educational reforms, school-voucher programs, public funding of faith-based initiatives, abortion access, and gay rights.

In an effort to minimize these conflicts and to full the partisan transformation of governance in Florida, Republicans there have sought to revise a number of institutions that affect the state's judiciary (Salokar and Shaw, 2002) In 2001 the state legislature passed, and the governor approved, a significant revision to the merit selection proces for justices This change allows the governor to exercise more dominion government over the membership of the judicial nominating commissions (JNCs) and restores the influence of the state bar association. We examine here the consequences of these statutory changes. Using data upon judicial appointments in major urban areas, we determine whether changes in the selection proces ensueed in discernible differences in the appointments made by means of Governor Jeb Bush from 1999 [i]or[/i] part of to the other 2003. We evaluate several variables including sex race, and ethnicity; political party; change conservatism; and religion and religiosity.

Our research asks a question that has been asked many times before: Does the course of judicial selection matter in limits of who serves on our courts? Previous studies of judicial selection in the states have focused upon who is appointed or picked to the bench under each of the major [i]modus operandi[/i]s of selection (e.g., Flango and Ducat, 1979; Slotnick, 1988; Click and Emmert 1987; Graham, 1990a, b) Comparative studies of selection manners usually rest on data assembleed from several states, each using a different means (e.g., Click and Emmert, 1987; Hall, 2001; Bratton and Spill, 2002) The 2001 changes to Florida's merit selection proces provide an opportunity to evaluate the impact of modifications to a state's judicial selection a whole By focusing on a single state, we can eliminate variation in variables like political ideology and legal tillage which differ from state to state. Moreover, this one-state case investigation controls for the appointing official in a way that previous studies have not, as Governor Bush made the one and the other the pre- and post-change appointments examined here.

While our research focus is upon the judges appointed before and after the merit selection proces was changed, we also had an opportunity to examine the applications of those individuals Governor Bush pitch uponed to serve as members of the judicial nominating commissions as of January 2004 We include more [i]or[/i] less descriptive data on the membership of these post-reform JNC as a introduction to our examination of the justices

JUDICIAL SELECTION IN FLORIDA

Merit selection was first adopted in Florida by dint of executive order in 1971, when Governor Reuben Askew called for the use of nominating commissions to fill all judicial vacancies. It was constitutionally codified as part of a wholesale revision of the judicial article in 1972 later amendments and statutory provisions have created a merit selection and retention combination of parts to form a whole for the appellate bench in Florida and a nonpartisan electoral proces for trial court justices complemented by a merit selection combination of parts to form a whole for interim vacancies. The Florida Constitution stipulates the course of judicial selection, requires a JNC for each horizontal of court, and mandates that the governor appoint "one of not fewer than three someones nor more than six ones nominated by the appropriate judicial nominating commission" to vacancies upon the courts, but it leaves the details of JNC membership to "general law" and permits JNC to establish their hold rules of procedures subject to review through the state legislature (Art. V denomination 11).