This document is out of date, but is left here for archival purposes. It accurately reflects the California Judicial system when it was published in 1998.

LWV HOME

Voters Guide to Judicial Elections

Table of Contents

Introduction
How are judges selected?
When and how are judges elected?
How can voters get information on judicial candidates?
What should a voter know about the sources of informaton?
What standards should a voter consider when voting on judges?
What are the gender and racial percentages within the court system?
Why vote on judges?
Who watches the judges?
References

There are two types of courts: trial courts and appellate courts. In trial courts, evidence to determine the facts of a case is heard by a single judge or by a judge and jury, and a verdict or judgement is reached based on the evidence and their understanding of the law that applies. Appellate courts review the work of the trial courts in cases that are appealed. There is no jury; appellate courts do not retry cases. Instead, a panel of judges hears arguments from opposing attorneys and reviews the lower court's record to determine whether there were errors serious enough to destroy the validity of the trial and justify overturning the lower court's original decision.

The municipal courts handle all arraignments and preliminary hearings for criminal cases and try all misdemeanor cases. Felony cases go the county superior court for trial. Civil cases in which damages sought are not more than $25,000 are heard in municipal courts. Superior courts hear cases where monetary claims exceed $25,000. Other civil matters such as child custody, divorce, probate, real estate, and juvenile cases are also filed in superior courts.

The seven-member Supreme Court , the state's highest court, is an appellate court. Death penalty convictions must be appealed and go directly to the Supreme Court. The intermediate courts of appeal handle other appeals from the trial courts that are established in districts covering different areas of the state. The Supreme Court chooses which appeals from court of appeal decisions it will hear.

To qualify for a judgeship, a person must have been a member of the State Bar for at least five years for the municipal courts and ten years as a State Bar member or as a judge for the higher courts.

Any qualified lawyer who wants to be a municipal or superior court judge can run for the office and try to get elected. Whenever a vacancy occurs between elections, however, the governor appoints someone to fill the office. Most trial court judges first reach the office by appointment. At election time, they then run as incumbents and usually have no opponents.

The governor appoints all Supreme Court and Court of Appeal justices. Appointments to these courts must be approved by majority vote of the Commission on Judicial Appointments whose members are the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Attorney General, and the senior presiding judge on the Court of Appeals. The commission holds public hearings to receive comments on the nominee's qualifications before voting on whether to confirm the governor's choice.

Those being considered for appointment to a judgeship are investigated by the State Bar's Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation which makes a confidential report to the governor on how qualified the person is to perform the duties of the office. Primarily governors, through their power of appointment, shape the character and quality of the California judiciary. There are about 1500 judgeships in California, and any governor who serves two terms will have the opportunity to make over 800 appointments which include both new judges and promotions to higher courts.

California uses one election system for trial court judges and another for appellate court justices.

Judges of the municipal and superior courts, which are the state's trial courts, serve 6-year terms. Candidates compete in nonpartisan races in June and November of even numbered years. If only one candidate runs in June, election is automatic without the need for a vote and the name is not even listed on the ballot. (About 90% of incumbent judges run unopposed.) When two or more candidates run in June, anyone who gets more than 50% of the vote is declared elected. When no candidate gets over 50%, the top two compete in a run-off election in November.

Justices of the Supreme Court and the courts of appeal serve 12-year terms. They are on the ballot only in November every four years when a governor is being elected. Justices who were appointed after the last gubernatorial election and those who are running for reelection after the expiration of the terms are listed without opposition on a nonpartisan ballot. Voters decide whether they continue in office or not by voting Yes or No. If the vote is No, the governor appoints a replacement who will be on the ballot in 4 years at the next gubernatorial election.

Read the local newspaper for coverage of the campaign. Check editorials for their endorsements and reasons for their choices in the week before the election.

Check the sample ballot that all counties mail voters. It will list only the judicial candidates that you will be able to vote on at your polling place. Then turn to the section that prints statements submitted by nonpartisan candidates. Judicial candidates can, for a fee, put a 200 word statement in the sample ballot, and many of them do.

Call the county or State Bar Association. Some of the larger bar associations evaluate all the candidates and rate them as being well qualified, qualified, or not qualified. Some ask their members to vote on the candidates who will be in contested elections and then endorse the ones who emerge well ahead of their opponents. Others poll their members and release the results to the public. Bar associations in the less populous counties do not usually evaluate judicial candidates.

Read the candidate's own campaign literature.

Evaluate the campaign literature that is mailed to you from groups who are either endorsing or opposing certain judges.

Call the League of Women Voters to find out whether they have included judges in a public meeting or printed candidate's guide.

Know what standards the sources are likely to use when they evaluate or endorse candidates.

Bar associations traditionally evaluate on the basis of qualities that relate to job performance, such as professional ability and knowledge of the law, civil and criminal trial experience, fairness, objectivity, work ethic, integrity, independence, and courtroom manner. A candidate's party affiliation or social and political views are considered irrelevant.

Newspapers vary, but will usually state the reason for the endorsements they make.

Prosecutors look for competence, but also for candidates who share their view on crime and punishment, who have worked in law enforcement or the district attorney's office, and who they think might rule more often in their favor than in the defense's.

Political groups may use party affiliation or previous service to the party as the standard for either support or opposition.

Single-issue groups may use a scorecard approach to a judge's rulings (or a challenger's promises) in their area of special interest.

Slate mailer organizations are commercial ventures and may use no standard except who paid to have their names included.

Know how to read between the lines to get the message.

Although judges must run as nonpartisan candidates, they often hint at their party affiliation. Although the Code of Judicial Conduct prohibits candidates from making promises other than the "faithful and impartial" performance of duties, some candidates imply that they will impose long sentences and will give the benefit of any doubt to the prosecution's side.

The right to vote comes without strings attached. Voters are free to use any standards that appeal to them.

Trial court judges deal constantly with people under stress, yet they need to remain calm, patient, and fair while trying to resolve disputes quickly. Appellate judges work primarily with records, research, legal briefs, and colleagues. Voters may conclude that "judicial temperament" is important for the lower courts and that legal background plus research and writing skills are more important at the appellate level.

Voters who place a very high value on judicial independence may want to use the type of job performance standards that many bar associations recommend. They will expect judges to decide cases as they think the facts and law require without regard to their personal views on the issue and without bending to public or political pressures. They think that elections should not be referendums on a judge's philosophy.

Voters who place a higher value on political accountability will also take into consideration specific decisions made by judges. They may look for a candidate whose views on social issues match their own. They believe that there are many instances in which judges, even at the trial court level, have a great deal of discretion in applying the law, and therefore their personal values and philosophy are important. They think this is especially relevant for Supreme Court justices because they consider major issues and their decisions are binding on the other courts.

Women judges in the California Court System

Racial identities of Women in the California Court System

Non-judicial Positions

It is the duty of the courts to dispense justice fairly and equitably to all that come in contact with the justice system. To maintain public confidence in the system, justice must also be perceived as being fair. When such a large proportion of the judiciary is comprised of white males (77% in superior courts, 69% in municipal courts), women and minorities are inclined to suspect bias. Studies initiated by the Chief Justice and Judicial Council have confirmed that over the last ten years, a bias does exist. Many measures have been taken to combat it. First and foremost is the requirement that all judges train to improve their gender and cultural sensitivity. Other measures-- such as revised standards for child support and efforts at mediation-- have had a positive impact in family court where women are often at the disadvantage of not being able to afford legal counsel.

Judges must deal with everything from minor disputes to society's most intractable problems. Their decisions have as great an impact on our lives as decisions made by the governor or legislator. The governor alone selects those who will serve on the bench. But at election time, voters become the judges of who is qualified to remain there. Those who vote are exercising an important opportunity to maintain the balance between judicial independence and accountability.

Trial lawyers, jurors, witnesses, prosecutors, public defenders, plaintiffs, and defendants all watch judges. Trials and other courtroom procedures are open to the public. Anyone who has any contact with the courts, either as a participant or a spectator, probably forms an opinion of the judges observed. Anyone with a complaint can contact the Commission on Judicial Performance.

The commission receives about 700 complaints in a year. The investigations and actions are announced to the public. If the commission finds the misconduct to be serious, it has the power to have the judge censured, retired, or removed from office.

Effective March 1996, anyone can access information about the California Court System through the California Courts Judicial Branch homepage.

References

• "Racial and Ethnic Composition of the California Trial Courts: A Report to the Judicial Council Advisory Committee on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts."
• "Justice in the Balance 2020," Commission on the Future of California Courts, 1993.
• "Achieving Equal Justice for Women and Men," Judicial Council's Advisory Commission on Gender Bias in the Courts, 1996.
• "1997 Final Report of the California Judicial Council Advisory Commission on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts."

Many thanks to the UC Davis Political Science SunTREC and the California Voter Foundation who collaborated with the League of Women Voters of California in the original web publication of this document. The Webdeveloper was Jamie Scheidegger.

LWVC Home - Voting Q&As - About Us

Send comments and suggestions concerning this page to cmwatts@ibm.net