Bench Memos

Florida Bar Upset Over Lost Influence

Florida is one of 13 states that use the so-called Missouri Plan to select state supreme-court justices. Consistent with national trends, that process has saddled Florida with a state supreme court that tends to put the agendas of left-leaning special-interest groups ahead of the rule of law.

In 2001 Governor Jeb Bush became one of the first public officials to confront this threat to judicial independence by signing legislation to reduce the influence of the state bar in judicial selection. Those modest reforms didn’t eliminate all of the problems with Florida’s method of selection, but they did do quite a bit to increase accountability in the selection process by giving the governor — an elected official — more say over who gets to serve on the commission that nominates judges.

Well, it turns out that not everyone is crazy about those reforms.

According to the Tampa Bay Times, the Florida bar is very upset that Governor Rick Scott has “rejected dozens of attorneys the Bar has nominated to serve on judicial nominating commissions.” Among the rejected lawyers are Tiffany Faddis, a board member of the Florida Justice Association (the trial lawyers), and W.C. Gentry, described as “a member of the legal ‘dream team’ that successfully sued the tobacco industry in the 1990s.”

The reporter seems to believe the liberal talking point that the commission was “created decades ago to professionalize the bench and make merit and qualifications at least as important as political connections.” As I have explained before, the real purpose of these nominating commissions was to allow state bar associations — political special interests themselves — to capture the judicial branch. And, as the empirical literature has shown since then, these commissions have basically pushed state courts to the left without demonstrating any improvement in quality or reductions in the importance of “political connections.” What the Florida bar is truly upset about is their diminishing ability to dictate state policy via friendly judicial appointees.

Carrie Severino is chief counsel and policy director to the Judicial Crisis Network.

Most Popular


Cold Brew’s Insidious Hegemony

Soon, many parts of the United States will be unbearably hot. Texans and Arizonans will be able to bake cookies on their car dashboards; the garbage on the streets of New York will be especially pungent; Washington will not only figuratively be a swamp. And all across America, coffee consumers will turn their ... Read More
National Security & Defense

The Warmonger Canard

Whatever the opposite of a rush to war is — a crawl to peace, maybe — America is in the middle of one. Since May 5, when John Bolton announced the accelerated deployment of the Abraham Lincoln carrier group to the Persian Gulf in response to intelligence of a possible Iranian attack, the press has been aflame ... Read More

The Merit of Merit-Based Immigration

Having chain-migrated his way into the White House and a little bit of political power, Donald Trump’s son-in-law is shopping around an immigration plan. And if you can get past the hilarious juxtaposition of the words “merit-based” and “Jared Kushner,” it’s a pretty good one. As things stand, the ... Read More
NR Webathon

We’ve Had Bill Barr’s Back

One of the more dismaying features of the national political debate lately is how casually and cynically Attorney General Bill Barr has been smeared. He is routinely compared to Roy Cohn on a cable-TV program that prides itself on assembling the most thoughtful and plugged-in political analysts and ... Read More
Film & TV

Game of Thrones: A Father’s Legacy Endures

Warning! If you don't want to read any spoilers from last night's series finale of Game of Thrones, stop reading. Right now. There is a lot to unpack about the Thrones finale, and I fully understand many of the criticisms I read on Twitter and elsewhere. Yes, the show was compressed. Yes, there were moments ... Read More