Description
There are several court cases that have emerged over the past few years dealing with judicial impropriety that went to the United States Supreme Court. An example would be West Virginia’s case of Caperton v. Massey.
You can find the stories here by clicking on the following links:
Assignment Guidelines
- Address the following in 4–5 pages:
- Most judges are elected; would it be better to have the judges appointed by a committee? Why or why not? Explain.
- Would the committee be affected by graft?
- If so, how?
- If not, how will it not be affected?
- Be specific and detailed in your responses.
- Would the committee be affected by graft?
- When judges violate the constitution, what should be the recourse? Explain.
- What current policies exist regarding judicial misconduct? Explain in detail.
- Do these policies sufficiently address judicial misconduct? Explain in detail.
- What can be done to improve these policies?
- Should there be political and financial pressures put on judges? Why or why not?
- Pertaining to re-election, should judges be held to a higher standard than other candidates for any political office? Why or why not?
- Most judges are elected; would it be better to have the judges appointed by a committee? Why or why not? Explain.
- Be sure to use at least 5 academic and scholarly sources to support your arguments.
- Be sure to reference all sources using APA style.
Explanation & Answer
Hi there, I have just completed the assignment. Please find attached. It has been nice working with you. 😊
Running head: ADDRESSING DIVERSITY IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICIES
Addressing Diversity in Criminal Justice Policies
Institution Affiliation
Date
1
ADDRESSING DIVERSITY IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICIES
2
Introduction
Of all the major branches of the government, the judiciary is perhaps the most sensitive in
terms of ensuring laws and human rights are enforced. It acts as the impartial tribunal which
ensures justice is achieved and fairness upheld irrespective of individuals and entities brought
before it. Confidence on individual members of the judiciary is particularly important. The idea
is that those being tried feel that they trust the system without discerning individuals and their
defining characters. Oaths taken by the judicial members serve an important purpose in creating
this confidence and trust, but it is the conduct of a judge during their tenure that determines if
they, in fact, uphold fairness and justice.
Most judges are elected; would it be better to have the judges appointed by a committee?
In the United States itself, there are a number of methods used to choose a judge. Even
though federal judges are appointed then vetted by the Senate, “87 percent of all state court
judges face elections, and 39 states elect at least some of their judges” (Liptak, 2008). On top of
the judicial responsibility of determining the law abidance, sentencing offenders and deciding
cases, these elections place political pressure on judges and clearly deny the judicial system
independence. Judges are more prone to make decisions that are inclined towards what is popular
than what is fair and just (New York Times Editorial, 2009). Instead, a bipartisan committee at
the affected local and state levels should appoint judges because they do not assess the popularity
or effort made during the campaign period, but the credentials and abilities of a candidate.
Would the committee be affected by graft?
Why a committee would be preferab...
Review
Review
24/7 Homework Help
Stuck on a homework question? Our verified tutors can answer all questions, from basic math to advanced rocket science!