The recent ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Caperton case makes it clear how important a fair and impartial judiciary is to the correct operation of our justice system. In Caperton v. Massey, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a judge must recuse themselves if it is reasonable to suspect that they have a particular interest in the outcome of a case – an interest that, if not leading directly to a bias, could reasonably make one suspicious of a bias.

Better Courts for Missouri is very interested in how this ruling might apply to a potential court hearing involving judicial selection reform-related ballot language. This year, judges were actively calling lawmakers and employees of the court were working with trial attorneys to block judicial selection reform. How can Missourians reasonably expect a fair and impartial hearing on judicial selection reform if the presiding judges were actively lobbying against it? Obviously, this is the kind of situation that the Supreme Court was looking to avoid when authoring the Caperton decision – a situation wherein public trust of the courts is lost as politics become central to a judgment. Will those justices who lobbied against judicial selection reform legislation recuse themselves if ballot language comes before the court? Surely, we cannot expect a fair and impartial hearing if they do not. Time will tell.

While neither of the judicial selection reform bills proposed during this legislative session succeeded in passing through both houses of the legislature and onto the ballot, the effort represented progress and is by no means over. Legislation of this scope can often take several attempts to pass, and the judicial selection reform movement is moving very quickly compared to many other legislative efforts. HJR10, the house version of the judicial selection reform bill, passed the House with a bi-partisan vote and was presented to the Senate during only its second year as a legislative proposal, seeing some vigorous and constructive debate but ultimately no vote as it was pushed aside during the legislative logjam that has become a hallmark of the end of session in the Senate.

Such progress is not to be taken lightly. Only a small fraction of bills ever make it past the House, and even fewer ever see the light of day in the Senate. For judicial reform to make it as far as it did in only its second year is a major accomplishment, and is a sign that reform is close at hand.

Better Courts for Missouri is busily working on the future of judicial selection reform, gearing up for next year’s effort to take back our courts from the special interests that currently control the selection process. The progress that was made this year shows that judicial selection reform is an issue that our legislators know they need to act on; with more floor time and a renewed effort next year, reform can become a reality. Passage of responsible reform is within sight, and we will work to make sure that it is a top legislative priority next year. In addition to our legislative plan, we will prepare to begin an initiative petition to bypass special interests and go directly to the people for a vote on reform.

We would like to give special thanks to Representative Stanley Cox, Speaker Ron Richard, Senator Jim Lembke, Senator Brad Lager, and Representative Steve Tilley for their hard work in advancing the cause of judicial selection reform during this session. Their help was indispensable.

Next year, look for a renewed, reinvigorated judicial selection reform effort as Better Courts for Missouri continues to advocate for transparency and accountability in the judicial selection process. Missourians deserve better than the current system can offer. We hope you will join us as we work toward a solution that will give us better courts and ensure that our judicial selection process is no longer dominated by cronyism or back-room deals with destructive special interest groups. With your help, we can make sure our courts’ primary concern is the best interests of Missourians, not the whims of the elite.

On page A12 of the April 18, 2009, issue, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial covering the effort for judicial selection reform in Missouri.

The editorial, entitled "Missouri Brakes - The Sue Me State Reconsiders Judicial Selection," says that the current system has "given disproportionate influence to lawyers groups," a situation that could be fixed by reforms that "would bring more transparency and reduce the power of the trial lawyers while expanding the range of candidates presented to the governor." Our state's courts are in trouble, but Missourians have the power to make them better.

You can read the full article here.