Toward More Qualified Judges

Toward more qualified judges

Sunday, May 22, 2005

There are lots of skilled trades in Ohio. It takes years of hard work and training for someone to receive union certification to be a bricklayer, a sheet metal worker, a pipefitter or a plumber. All are important positions - jobs in which training and experience matter.

One job that doesn't require a lot of experience or training in this state is that of a judge. For whatever reason, the legislature doesn't think those things are all that important for someone whose duties involve interpreting the U.S. and Ohio constitutions and protecting the rights of victims and the accused.

In Ohio, all one needs to do is graduate from law school, pass the bar exam and then wait six years before running for a judgeship. It doesn't matter if those six years are spent practicing law or planting tulips in Brazil. All that matters is that the calendar turns over six times.

As a result, Ohioans - especially those in CuyahogaCounty - have tended to elect more than their share of bad judges. In this part of the state, a judicial candidate's surname means far more than his or her qualifications.

For nearly a decade now, Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Tom Moyer and, at times, the various bar associations have rightly argued for stiffening the qualifications for judicial candidates. Attempts to persuade legislators have been unsuccessful.

Now, Cleveland-area state Sen. Tim Grendell and Cincinnati-area state Rep. Bill Seitz have introduced a bill designed to improve the quality of judges in the state. It is a proposal that cannot be ignored by any legislator who sincerely believes in the importance of electing qualified judges.

The bill's best feature would increase the amount of time a lawyer must be licensed to practice before seeking a judgeship and add some badly needed training requirements. For trial-court judges, the six-year period would become 10 years, while candidates for the Supreme Court would need 15 years' experience. The bill would also require candidates to enroll in a 40-hour judicial training program.

Yet another appealing provision would require that candidates for judicial appointments be screened by an independent committee, which would make a nonbinding recommendation of three people to the governor. As written, the bill would allow the governor to ignore the committee's recommendations. That provision should be changed to require the governor to choose one of the recommended candidates.

The only provision that gives us pause is the one that would increase judicial terms to eight years for trial-court judges, 10 years for appellate judges and 12 years for the Supreme Court. All elected judges in the state now serve six-year terms. And though we are open-minded about lengthening those terms, 10 or 12 years would be entirely too long.

Aside from the troubling term extensions, the Grendell-Seitz bill, which Moyer enthusiastically supports, is a meaningful attempt to improve the quality of Ohio's judiciary.

Every legislator who believes we need better judges should support most aspects of this thoughtful proposal.