Supreme Weekly: All over the map

---

This article may not adhere to Ballotpedia’s current neutrality policies.

---

September 1, 2011

by: Katy Farrell

This Supreme Weekly looks at the results of recent transitions in the realm of judicial selection, in addition to providing an overview of cases affecting the state Supreme Courts this week. With a variety of states covered, we are looking at developments across the nation.

Judicial selection

• •

From a confirmation in California, to alterations in Missouri, to an announcement in Alabama, this week's events highlighted the differences in judicial selection across the country.

California

For Goodwin Liu, the federal confirmation process probably just seems like a bad dream. Yesterday the professor was confirmed to the California Supreme Court, in a little over a month between gubernatorial nomination and taking the oath of office.

Earlier this week, the California State Bar and Commission on Judicial Nominees rated the new justice as "exceptionally well qualified," allowing him to sail through confirmation. Members of the commissions seemed perplexed at the uncompromising viewpoint of the federal Senate to Liu's federal nomination in 2010 and 2011. One member said that in Liu's writings, "I found no bias, just thousands of pages of brilliant prose."

Liu fills the vacancy left by the retirement of Carlos Moreno, who stepped down from the court in February. Liu was the first judicial nominee of Governor Jerry Brown's current term.

The new justice will serve until the end of 2012, when it will be necessary to allow voters to weigh in on the confirmation. He must stand for retention in the 2012 election.

Missouri

For the first time, the Missouri Appellate Judicial Commission conducted hearings for a vacancy on the Supreme Court publicly. In an attempt to make the selection process more transparent, thirteen applicants for the position submitted to an interview process that usually takes place behind closed doors.

The interviews occurring this week are to replace retired Justice Michael Wolff. In Missouri, appellate judges are selected using the Missouri Plan, a Commission-selection, political appointment method of judicial selection. This method has been under attack by conservative groups across the nation in the past year, perhaps fueled by the 2010 election in Iowa.

Conducting public interviews is seen as a way to involve more individuals in the judicial selection process. Still, the deliberation of the Appellate Judicial Commission will be closed. The commission plans to release the vote totals for each of the nominees, however.

Ironically, this move to publicize nomination proceedings in Missouri comes at the same time that Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie is fighting a newspaper to keep secret the names of Supreme Court nominees. (For more on that story, read: Hawaii newspaper sues governor over judicial nominees.)

Alabama

Focusing on a different method of judicial selection, yesterday Chief Justice Charles Malone officially announced his candidacy for the Alabama Supreme Court in 2012. Malone was appointed by Governor Robert Bentley in August to fill the unexpired term of retired Chief Justice Sue Bell Cobb. Judges in Alabama compete in partisan elections.

Malone is the second candidate to declare for the seat. His announcement follows that of Charles Graddick, Presiding Judge of the Circuit 13 Court. Both candidates are seeking the Republican nomination, ensuring an interesting race in a state with historically notorious judicial elections.

Case roundup

• • • • • •

We're switching things up this week, providing a quick overview of interesting state Supreme Court cases. Below are a sample of cases accepted, hearings held, and rulings announced.

Cases accepted

• Indiana Supreme Court: On September 8, the court will hear a class-action lawsuit filed by state employees. The suit claims that some employees were required to work 40 hours a week, while others were compensated equally for only working 37.5 hours. The trial judge ruled in favored employees, awarding $42.4 million in back pay.

Remember the case?
Still no ruling in the Russell Pearce recall challenge, but the Arizona Supreme Court will allow the parties to bypass the Court of Appeals. On Sept. 13, the high court will review pleadings and quickly decide whether the recall may proceed. For more, check out: Supreme Weekly: Hot topics hit the courts.

• Nebraska Supreme Court: On September 7, the state Attorney General will argue that a video game crated by American Amusements is one of chance, not skill, and should not be allowed in public places under state law. Earlier, Judge Steven Burns found that one of the three games modes did predominantly make it a game of chance. The company agreed to reprogram the game, but the state wants the game outlawed entirely.

• Arkansas Supreme Court: As part of another suit, the court is asked to rule whether Ticketmaster's fees violate the Deceptive Trade Practices Act. In a class-action suit, the plaintiffs argue that the additional fees, above the stated price of the ticket, violates the provision that a company or person cannot sell a ticket for an amount greater than what is advertised or printed on the ticket.

Hearings

• Kansas Supreme Court: The court is hearing a case in which Kansas University's Project for Innocence argues that DNA testing proves the innocence of Kenneth Haddock. Haddock has been serving a life sentence since 1992, after being convicted of murdering his wife.

• Hawaii Supreme Court: The Hawaii State Teachers Association has filed a writ with the high court, asking it to rule that the Hawaii Labor Relations Board consider its petitions. This comes after Governor Neil Abercrombie imposed an offered contact, instead of continuing negotiations. The teachers association says this violates its constitutional right to bargain.

Rulings

• South Carolina Supreme Court: The court found unconstitutional that a small number of local legislators could override the governor's veto. It said that two-thirds majority applies to a quorum in both the House and Senate. This struck down a long tradition of legislators abstaining in order to allow members directly affected by a bill to be the only ones casting override votes.

• Wyoming Supreme Court: The court reaffirmed a state law enacted in the 1980s, which holds that bar owners cannot be held liable for the actions of their patrons. Relatives of a couple that died in a head-on collision sued the owners of the bars that served the drunk driver responsible for the crash.

See also

• Supreme Weekly: Hot topics hit the courts
• Judgepedia's Supreme Weekly: The States