Another election season approaches and with it the debate over the proper mechanism to select state judges. This has been a recurring debate in American politics, and today’s critics of judicial elections show no sign of fatigue. The ABA and various state bar associations, the American Judicature Society, and quite a few academic and judicial critics have recently been joined by retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor in the attack on judicial elections. This article offers, by contrast, a look at the seldom-heard arguments in favor of electing judges, and raises significant questions about the alternatives urged by some of the critics....

This is the first issue following our twenty-fifth anniversary. Audio and video from the 25th National Lawyers Convention is online. In addition, we are pleased to announce that the transcripts of nearly all of the panel debates will be published in various law reviews this coming year, including The Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, The Georgetown Journal of Law and Public Policy, The Texas Review of Law and Policy, The William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review, The New York Journal of Law and Liberty, Ave Maria Law Review, Hofstra Law Review, Regent University Law Review, The Southern New England Roundtable Symposium Law Journal, The SMU Technology Law Review, The University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review, and The Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics. Publication details appear on the individual webpage for each panel in our new Multimedia Archive. Consequently, we will not be publishing the transcripts as an issue of Engage this year; our next issue will be in June.

Senator Arlen Specter and a panel of experts examine the state of the judicial nomination and confirmation process.  How does the pace of confirmations measure up to previous, similarly-situated administrations and Congresses?  Has the administration been sufficiently attentive to the issue of nominations?  Has the Senate been remiss in its duty to hold hearings and votes?  What can be expected for the balance of the President's term; is the Senate entitled to effectively foreclose action on pending nominees at some point in anticipation of a Presidential election?

The Federalist Society's Litigation and Professional Responsibility Practice Groups presented this panel discussion at the 2007 Annual National Lawyers Convention on November 16, 2007. The panelists included Prof. Theodore Eisenberg of Cornell Law School, Mr. Walter K. Olson of the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Mr. Victor E. Schwartz of Shook, Hardy & Bacon, Prof. David C. Vladeck of the Georgetown University Law Center, and Dean David M. Schizer of the Columbia University School of Law as the moderator.