how come are some judges appointed and some elected ?

[AllaN01Bear]

[Ocelot II]

1. Each state has its own procedure. Federal judges are all appointed, but

judges in state courts can be either elected or appointed or both. In my state, the governor appoints a judge for an initial term and after that term they have to run for re-election, but they don't run affiliated with a party.

[PoliticAverse]

2. Because different states have different constitutions and laws. n/t

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

3. Which judges? Where?

Essentially it depends on where you are talking about.

[AllaN01Bear]

4. thank you all for your info.

[Ocelot II]

7. Not true in my state, MN.

The Governor appoints judges, and after that initial term expires they have to run for election for further terms. They don't run with party affiliation.

[rsdsharp]

10. In IA, for trial judges, the governor chooses between two candidates

two candidates selected by a nominating commission composed of both lawyers and lay members. For Supreme Court, the governor chooses between three candidates.

Once selected, they periodically stand for a retention election. It’s an up or down vote; they don’t run against anyone. If they aren’t retained (it’s only happened for times, and three were justices who had voted in the unanimous decision allowing same sex marriage) the selection process starts again.

There is also a mandatory retirement age for judges.

[RockRaven]

6. In addition to appointed or elected, there are some judges who get appointed/nominated but

require voters to affirm their appointments. I know there are some judges in CA like that, which I see on the ballot from time to time, where the governor appoints them and they end up on the ballot as a YES/NO vote.

[RockRaven]

13. I looked it up to make sure I was remembering correctly... I was, pretty much.

The CA Supreme (7) and Appeals Courts (102) do it one way, Superior Courts (1535) a different way.

Those top 109 judges are all doing 12 year terms, and like the US Senate the term timing does not reset or restart when a person is replaced mid-term -- the seat/office has its own unchanging election schedule. When there is a vacancy a commission recommends candidates to the governor, the governor a points someone, and a second different commission approves or vetoes the appointment. If approved the person starts working and appears on the ballot during the next gubernatorial election year, for confirmation for the remainder of the 12 year term (if any). And any time the 12 year term expires they appear on the ballot for a new 12 year term. Always just yes-no, not choosing between people.

The Superior Court judges, the basic state court judges, appear on the ballot without party affiliation in even numbered years, for six year terms, and those are multi-candidate elections, not the up-down votes of the higher court positions. They've got to get 50%+ so if there are three candidates there might need to be a runoff. But they don't appear on the ballot if they run unopposed, they just get re-elected automatically. I think that was tripping me up because I seem to see more of the yes/no judges on the ballot than the A vs B vs C. And if Superior Court vacancies happen the governor just appoints someone until the next general election, when usually they run for re-election.

[Hamlette]

9. In my state it's not really like a re-election. They can't campaign to keep their seats.

But they have to get over 50% approval after 10 years on the bench.

Only two judge have failed to be approved for "reelection".

[lastlib]

15. "Missouri Plan"--"non-partisan" selection method.

Under this plan, first used in my home state, a "non-partisan" commission examines candidates for a judgeship, and submits three nominees to the governor. Governor picks one who is then confirmed by the state Senate for a term. At the end of that term, the judge files for retention, which is submitted for a referendum, the question being "Shall Judge 'Jones' of the nth Circuit be retained in office?" He is retained for another term if the majority vote is "yes;" if the vote is "no," he must step down and the process is repeated.

Supposedly, it takes politics out of the process, but that's not the reality. The judges themselves cannot conduct campaigns on their behalf, but political parties often do it for them.