FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W341834277> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W341834277 startingPage "475" @default.
• W341834277 abstract "I. INTRODUCTION The New York State Supreme Court is New York's statewide trial court of general jurisdiction. Justices of the state supreme court have been chosen by popular election since that change was effected by the New York Constitution of 1846. (1) With the exception of a brief period between 1912 and 1920, political parties have nominated their candidates for the supreme court using delegate-based conventions. In Lopez Torres v. New York State Board of Elections, the federal courts in New York determined that the state's current statutory embodiment of the judicial nominating convention is unconstitutional, enjoined its further use, and mandated nomination by the direct primary method pending legislative action. (2) The United States Supreme Court, in a brief and unanimous decision, reversed the lower courts, finding no constitutional violation in New York's convention system. (3) Though the judicial nominating convention has survived the Lopez Torres case, the decisions have revived the perennial question of the best mode of judicial selection in New York. Indeed, in a stinging single-paragraph concurrence, Justice Stevens is sharply critical of New York's process and to some degree the policy of electing judges in general. (4) This Article argues in favor of a constitutional amendment in New York instituting a local merit-based appointment system for state supreme court justices. It reviews the history of judicial selection, particularly that of the state supreme court, since New York's provincial days, and concludes that several enduring and guiding principles regarding the subject can be gleaned from the state's several experiments with different modes. Applying these principles, the Article concludes that the merit-based appointive system is preferable, as partisan and personal politics can never be wholly divorced from judicial selection, but the judicial election campaign and its insidious incidents can. Part II describes the judicial election and nomination processes for state supreme court justices in New York and details the statutory framework for the current judicial district nominating convention. Part III briefly reviews the Lopez Torres case, including the arguments of the parties and the courts' decisions. Part IV chronicles the history of judicial selection in New York, particularly for the supreme court, and posits several enduring historical principles useful in contemplating the best mode of judicial selection. Part V expounds on these principles, explores the judicial election campaign, and argues in favor of a merit-based appointive system. II. THE JUDICIAL NOMINATING CONVENTION Since 1846, New York's Constitution has required that state supreme court justices be chosen by the electors of the judicial district in which they are to serve. (5) To that end, New York is currently divided into twelve judicial districts, each encompassing several of the state's 150 assembly districts. (6) The judicial districts currently contain as few as nine and as many as twenty-four assembly districts. (7) New York State Supreme Court justices are elected from the judicial districts at the ordinary November general election. (8) A place on the general election ballot can be obtained either by receiving the nomination of a major party (9) at its judicial district nominating convention or by filing an independent nominating petition, which requires 1,500 signatures (4,000 in New York City). (10) In addition, any candidate can have his or her name written-in on the general election ballot. (11) With the exception of a brief period between 1912 and 1920, political parties in New York have nominated their candidates for the state supreme court using delegate based judicial conventions, with delegates elected at party primary elections or other nominating conventions. The current form of the judicial nominating convention was statutorily enacted in 1921, following several years of a failed experiment with direct primary nominations of supreme court justices. …" @default.
• W341834277 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W341834277 creator A5049907652 @default.
• W341834277 date "2008-03-22" @default.
• W341834277 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W341834277 title "Lopez Torres and Judicial Selection in New York: An Argument for Merit-Based Appointment to the State Supreme Court" @default.
• W341834277 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W341834277 type Work @default.
• W341834277 sameAs 341834277 @default.
• W341834277 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W341834277 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W341834277 hasAuthorship W341834277A5049907652 @default.
• W341834277 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W341834277 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W341834277 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W341834277 hasConcept C2775925287 @default.
• W341834277 hasConcept C2776154427 @default.
• W341834277 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W341834277 hasConcept C2909001134 @default.
• W341834277 hasConcept C46415393 @default.
• W341834277 hasConcept C47855350 @default.
• W341834277 hasConcept C48764862 @default.
• W341834277 hasConcept C79638320 @default.
• W341834277 hasConcept C87501996 @default.
• W341834277 hasConceptScore W341834277C144024400 @default.
• W341834277 hasConceptScore W341834277C17744445 @default.
• W341834277 hasConceptScore W341834277C199539241 @default.
• W341834277 hasConceptScore W341834277C2775925287 @default.
• W341834277 hasConceptScore W341834277C2776154427 @default.
• W341834277 hasConceptScore W341834277C2778272461 @default.
• W341834277 hasConceptScore W341834277C2909001134 @default.
• W341834277 hasConceptScore W341834277C46415393 @default.
• W341834277 hasConceptScore W341834277C47855350 @default.
• W341834277 hasConceptScore W341834277C48764862 @default.
• W341834277 hasConceptScore W341834277C79638320 @default.
• W341834277 hasConceptScore W341834277C87501996 @default.
• W341834277 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W341834277 hasLocation W3418342771 @default.
• W341834277 hasOpenAccess W341834277 @default.
• W341834277 hasPrimaryLocation W3418342771 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W138528634 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W1481030464 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W1551446008 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W1825418526 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W2020099099 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W2049554300 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W208829756 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W2207796539 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W2271216342 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W2489228411 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W2955585489 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W3005102170 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W3121887752 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W3122351142 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W3140306199 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W3183924683 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W403990612 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W65722812 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W814687815 @default.
• W341834277 hasRelatedWork W879526482 @default.
• W341834277 hasVolume "71" @default.
• W341834277 isParatext "false" @default.
• W341834277 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W341834277 magId "341834277" @default.
• W341834277 workType "article" @default.