Judicial Elections and Partisan Endorsement of Judicial Candidates in Minnesota

1941 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malcolm C. Moos
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Good Chance ◽  
District Court ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Election Law ◽  
Judicial Elections ◽  
Chief Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Judges

All judicial officers in the state of Minnesota, including the chief justice and six associate justices of the supreme court and fifty judges in the district courts, are required to be nominated and elected without partisan designation. Judicial nominations and elections were made nonpartisan by the election law of 1912. During a quarter of a century, the nonpartisan ballot has given Minnesota the services of an exceptionally well qualified bench, and sentiment is practically unanimous in favor of continuing this method of selecting judges.Once elevated to the bench, a Minnesota judge has a good chance of continuing in that capacity as long as he wishes to serve. Supreme court justices have been regularly reelected; so that their tenure has been, for all practical purposes, the same as that of federal judges. Three of the present members of the supreme court have been elected once, two have been elected twice, one three times, and one four times. With one exception, the supreme court justices since 1912 have retired from office by resignation or death.Of the eighty-four district court judges who have served since 1912, only four have been defeated at the polls when seeking reelection. At the present time, thirty-six of the state's fifty district court judges have been elected two or more times, and twenty-three have been elected three or more times.

Enforcing Rights against the State in India

2019 ◽  
pp. 211-279
Author(s):  
Florian Matthey-Prakash
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
The State ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Public Interest Litigation ◽  
High Courts ◽  
The Supreme Court

Chapter 4 deals with the issue of lack of access to justice and attempts to find reasons for the inaccessibility of the higher judiciary. While it appears to be clear to observers that the Supreme Court and high courts are not accessible enough, surprisingly, there are actually no empirical studies that examine why this is the case. Some factors can, however, be deduced from a study dealing with the inaccessibility of district courts, that is, the lower judiciary.The fourth chapter also shows that the institution of Public Interest Litigation, for various reasons, cannot compensate for lack of access to justice, and that the state is not properly implementing (or not at all exploring) many other possible alternative mechanisms.

scholarly journals Urgensi Pembentukan Peradilan Khusus Pemilu dalam rangka Mewujudkan Integritas Pemilu

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 267
Author(s):  
Iwan Rois ◽  
Ratna Herawati
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Research Method ◽  
District Court ◽  
Election Law ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
High Court ◽  
Provincial Level ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
General Elections

This study aims to analyze the need to establish a special election court which has the authority to solve various election law cases in order to realize elections with integrity; and analyzing the formulation of election special justice in order to realize the integrity of the election. The research method used is the method of normative legal research and the implementation of this research collects data from various sources in order to get an answer to the issues that have been formulated. The results of the study shows that  the purpose of the need for the formation of special judicial elections; First, to meet the growing demands of increasingly complex justice in society and more election law enforcement so as to realize the integrity of the elections; Second, To handle the election law cases quickly and simply so as to obey the integrity of the election. Formulation; First, the election special justice to be able to work quickly and simply in handling election law cases, domiciled at the central and provincial level, then entering the District Court or the High Court; Secondly, the Guidelines for the election special judicial law shall be based on Supreme Court Regulation Number 4 Year 2017 on Procedures for the Settlement of Administrative Offenses of the General Elections in the Supreme Court. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis perlunya membentuk peradilan khusus pemilu yang mempunyai kewenangan menyelesaikan berbagai perkara hukum pemilu agar terwujud pemilu yang berintegritas; dan menganalisis formulasi pembentukan peradilan khusus pemilu dalam rangka mewujudkan integritas pemilu. Metode penelitian yang digunakan ialah metode penelitian hukum normatif dan pelaksanaan dari penelitian ini mengumpulkan bahan hukum dari berbagai sumber guna mendapatkan suatu jawaban atas pokok-pokok permasalahan yang telah dirumuskan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa tujuan perlunya pembentukan peradilan khusus pemilu; Pertama, Untuk memenuhi tuntutan perkembangan akan keadilan yang semakin kompleks dalam masyarakat dan lebih penegakan hukum pemilu sehingga mewujudkan integritas pemilu; Kedua, Untuk menangani perkara hukum pemilu dengan cepat dan sederhana sehingga mewudkan integritas pemilu. Formulasi; Pertama, Peradilan khusus pemilu agar bisa bekerja cepat dan sederhana dalam menangani perkara hukum pemilu, berkedudukan di tingkat pusat dan provinsi, selanjutnya masuk pada Pengadilan Negeri atau Pengadilan Tinggi; Kedua, Pedoman beracara pada peradilan khusus pemilu berdasarkan pada Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2017 tentang Tata Cara Penyelesaian Pelanggaran Administratif Pemilihan Umum Di Mahkamah Agung.

scholarly journals Upaya Hukum Banding Terhadap Putusan Verstek Yang Diajukan Oleh Pihak Tergugat Dikaitkan Dengan Asas Kepastian Hukum Dalam Tinjauan HIR/RBG

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 129
Author(s):  
Sherly Ayuna Putri ◽  
Achmad Syauqi Nugraha
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Research Method ◽  
The State ◽  
District Court ◽  
State Court ◽  
Court Ruling ◽  
Positive Law ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Case Number

The verdict of Verstek is the ruling that where the defendant, although called legitimately, does not come on a given day, and does not tell others to be facing his deputy, the claim is accepted with a decision without the presence (Verstek). Resistance is a legal effort against the verdict that was dropped outside the presence of the defendant. Essentially the resistance was provided for the defendant who (in general) was defeated. The Verzet is governed in article 125 paragraph (3) and 129 HIR, article 149 clause (3) Jo. 153 RBg. The research method which is conducted in this study is normative juridical research that emphasizes on the science of law and conduct an inventory of positive law relating to the effectiveness of statutory regulations in the fi eld of legal and descriptive analytical describing and analyzing the problems based on the legislation governing the law of civil proceedings regarding the legal efforts of Verstek decision. Based on the results of the study obtained fi rst problem of Verstek decision to be fi led by the defendant on the decision of the District Court of Bale Bandung Case Number: 37/PDT. G/2018/PN. BLB and the state court ruling of the Simalungun case number: 36/PDT. G/2013/PN. LICENSE does not conform to the norm in article 125 HIR and section 149 RBg. The two remedies that can be done by the plaintiff or the appeal is to apply for the appeal with the reasons set out in article 30 paragraph (1) of Law No. 5 of 2004 concerning the Supreme Court, among other things relating to the judge is not authorized or exceeds the limits of authority and or wrong in implementing or violating applicable laws.

Singapore

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire van Overdijk ◽  
Terence Seah
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
State Courts ◽  
District Court ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Court Order ◽  
High Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Mental Capacity Act ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Singapore is a common law country. Judicial power is vested in the Supreme Court (High Court and Court of Appeal) and the State Courts (District Courts and Magistrates’ Courts). Pursuant to the Supreme Court of Judicature (Transfer of Mental Capacity Proceedings to District Court) Order 2010, proceedings under the Mental Capacity Act (cap 177A, 2010 Rev Ed) (‘MCA’) are now first heard by the District Court.

The Gubernatorial Controversy in North Dakota

1935 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 418-432
Author(s):  
Roy L. Miller
Keyword(s):  
North Dakota ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal District ◽  
The State ◽  
District Court ◽  
Federal District Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Unique Experience ◽  
Political Conditions ◽  
The Right

Although many of our states have exhibited unsettled political conditions in recent months, North Dakota has passed through a unique experience in having four different governors occupy the executive office in six and one-half months. Twice during this period, the supreme court of the state has been requested to determine the right of the governor to hold office, and in each instance it has elevated the lieutenant-governor to the office. The first occasion resulted from the conviction of Governor William Langer of a felony after a trial in the federal district court, and the second involved the constitutional qualifications of Governor Thomas H. Moodie, elected last November.

Swineherds and Hogs on Ice: Leadership Impacts for State Chief Judges

2021 ◽  
pp. 1532673X2198901
Author(s):  
Thomas Gray ◽  
Banks Miller
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Political Leadership ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
Random Chance ◽  
Chief Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Better Than

Chief judges stand as visible leaders of their courts. Analyses of the Supreme Court focus on the role of the chief justice as an institution-builder seeking out public-facing consensus to protect Court legitimacy. Studying the powers of chief judges and political leadership in general is difficult. Analyzing all 50 states over 16 years we find no evidence that the identity of chief judges explains consensus behavior any better than random chance. This is true even among the subset of chief judges with additional institutional powers like opinion assignment. We show that court structures explain consensus, while leader features do not. Being chief judge correlates with an elevated likelihood of being in the majority, particularly in cases decided by one vote. These results add to our understanding of leadership on courts and imply that the office of chief judge at the state level is more symbolic than uniquely powerful.

scholarly journals The "Broadest Reasonable Interpretation" and Applying Issue Preclusion to Administrative Patent Claim Construction

2018 ◽  
pp. 349
Author(s):  
Jonathan Tietz
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Property Right ◽  
District Court ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Patent Claim ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Patent Claim Construction

Inventions are tangible. Yet patents comprise words, and words are imprecise. Thus, disputes over patents involve a process known as “claim construction,” which formally clarifies the meaning of a patent claim’s words and, therefore, the scope of the underlying property right. Adversarial claim construction commonly occurs in various Article III and Article I settings, such as district courts or the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). When these proceedings ignore each other’s claim constructions, a patent’s scope can become inconsistent and unpredictable. The doctrine of issue preclusion could help with this problem. The Supreme Court recently reemphasized in B & B Hardware v. Hargis Industries that administrative decisions can have issue preclusive effect. But district courts and the PTAB use formally different legal standards in claim construction, where the district court takes a narrower view of a patent’s scope. This Note contends that a claim construction determination made by the PTAB under the “broadest reasonable interpretation” standard should, indeed, be the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim. To facilitate uniformity and public notice, issue preclusion should be applied such that the PTAB’s “broadest reasonable interpretation” is an outer interpretive bound of a patent’s scope in subsequent district court litigation.

Rethinking the State Secrets Privilege

2010 ◽  
pp. 656-672
Author(s):  
Louis Fisher
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Playing Field ◽  
Federal Judiciary ◽  
Past Half Century ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Government ◽  
Federal Judges ◽  
State Secrets ◽  
Past Half

This article discusses the concept of state secrets privilege which is designed to prevent private litigants from gaining access to agency documents sought in cases involving National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance, extraordinary rendition, and other intelligence programs. Before the Reynolds case, the Supreme Court recognized the state secrets privilege. Over the past half century, federal judges gave “deference” to the executive claims on sensitivity and confidentiality of agency records without ever looking at the disputed document. However in 1953, the Supreme Court was misled by the government. Since then, there has been an interest in having Congress enact legislation to assure greater independence for the federal judiciary and provide a more even playing field for private litigants.

Selection of Justices and Judges

2020 ◽  
pp. 141-146
Author(s):  
Danny M. Adkison ◽  
Lisa McNair Palmer
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Chief Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Selection Of

This chapter highlights Article VII-B of the Oklahoma constitution, which concerns the selection of justices and judges. Section 1 states that “the provisions of this Article shall govern the selection and tenure of all Justices of the Supreme Court and Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals of the State of Oklahoma.” Section 2 sets forth the procedure for a judicial officer to run for unlimited additional terms of office. The provision in Section 3 creates a Judicial Nominating Commission, which possesses jurisdiction to determine whether the nominees for judicial office meet applicable requirements, and to determine the existence of vacancies on the commission. In the event of a judicial vacancy, Section 4 instructs the Judicial Nominating Commission to submit the names of three nominees to the governor and the chief justice of the supreme court. Section 5 sets forth the specific parameters of judicial terms of office. In an attempt to prohibit political partiality by judges, Section 6 prohibits judges from making contributions to, or holding office in, a political entity. Lastly, Section 7 concerns the effective date of Article VII-B.

Judicial Department

2020 ◽  
pp. 123-134
Author(s):  
Danny M. Adkison ◽  
Lisa McNair Palmer
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Appellate Courts ◽  
State Supreme Court ◽  
Chief Justice

This chapter explores Article VII of the Oklahoma constitution, which concerns the judiciary. Section 1 states that “the judicial power of this State shall be vested in the Senate, sitting as a Court of Impeachment, a Supreme Court, the Court of Criminal Appeals, the Court on the Judiciary, the State Industrial Court, the Court of Bank Review, the Court of Tax Review, and such intermediate appellate courts as may be provided by statute, District Courts, and such Boards, Agencies and Commissions created by the Constitution or established by statute as exercise adjudicative authority or render decisions in individual proceedings.” The Oklahoma Supreme Court is the head of the state’s judicial system; all other courts are inferior to it. Section 2 provides for the number, terms, vacancies, and qualifications of supreme court justices. The justices shall choose from among their members a chief justice and a vice chief justice. Section 4 provides for the jurisdiction of the state supreme court. The chapter then looks at the provisions for district courts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document