Opponents of Improving the Missouri Plan Argue that the current judicial selection system is based on merit.

Merit is of little consequence.

In 1985, a Republican governor selected his 33-year-old Chief of Staff, after the Commission nominated him at the Governor’s request. He boasted youth and a stellar academic record, but had no judicial experience and virtually no legal experience.

Additionally, in 2007, the Appellate Judicial Commission nominated a Democrat who had the lowest Missouri Bar rating of ANY appellate or supreme court judge. The nominee was in the bottom 20% of all St. Louis judges as well.

A second nominee for the 2007 vacancy graduated in the bottom half of her class in law school. She subsequently failed to distinguish herself as a practicing lawyer. As a judge on the court of appeals, she concurred in an extraordinary number of cases with the Chair of the Appellate Judicial Commission.

Another applicant who sought to fill the 2007 vacancy was not nominated, despite possessing obviously more impressive credentials. This applicant graduated at the top of her undergraduate class at the prestigious MU journalism school, thereafter from Harvard Law School, and went on to become a partner in one of Missouri’s largest law firms. This rejected applicant possessed more experience than at least one judge who WAS nominated and was of the same race and gender as the nominee with the low Bar ratings.

Merit? We think not.