Building A Strong Wyoming

I disagree with the appointing of judges. I believe that our overall judicial system id done a disservice when judges are beholden to those who appoint them, and cannot be removed/reelected on a regular basis. If a judge is appointed he/she is naturally biased and thankful to the person or office that appointed that particular judge, and I find it hard to believe that said judge can be totally unbiased and allow the judicial process to unfold unfettered. By electing judges they then understand that the laws and rules must be followed to the letter and if not then that judge runs the risk of answering to the people he/she should ultimately answer to. The people.

As far as requiring judges to retire at any particular age, I am against that particular practice. Although I do feel that the judicial system should reflect the general public, and there should be more oversight when a judge is far above or below the median age of the public that that person represents.

Thank you reastman.  Those are cogent and thoughtful comments.  I really appreciate you taking the time to post a comment.  I am not always that sure if anyone is actually reading these posts or if they are helpful for providing public discourse of issues.  I understand your point about a judge possibly being beholden to the Governor since he appointed them.  But I would much rather deal with that risk, then the Judge having to collect campaign funds from the lawyers that appear in their courtroom in order to run for office.  Both systems have their flaws, but I believe appointment has less risks than the risks associated with influence through elections.  I heard a story recently of an Ohio supreme court justice that was preparing for their re-election campaign, that was estimating that he would need to raise $10 million.  And most of the money will come from the corporations and attorneys that will be in front of him.