New Mexico
Judicial Branch of Government
Summary
of Presentations by Judge Brett Loveless and David Standridge at the East
Gateway Coalition meeting April 19, 2012.
District
criminal court handles felonies.
Appeals
court reviews disputed judgments.
Supreme
Court is the final appellate authority in the state.
There are a total of 118 Judges and
Justices in New Mexico.
District
courts—13 in all. In our district (Bernalillo county), there are 26 judges; 9
of whom handle criminal cases. There are “special” courts (e.g., Veterans,
children). On the civil side, there are divorce courts, claims court, and some
others.
Federal
criminal courts are parallel organizations handling alleged violations of
Federal law.
How do
judges get “on the bench”? NOTE: Federal judges serve for life, so some of this
doesn’t apply to them.
·
ELECTION. A qualified
candidate (licensed attorney in the state) can run for election. Judicial
candidates’ names appear at the “bottom of the ballot” following political
races, bond issues, and other ballot initiatives. More about this later.
·
APPOINTMENT. In the
case of a vacancy (e.g., retirement, resignation, removal), qualified
candidates are nominated (by themselves or others), reviewed and vetted by a
non-partisan committee (UNM Dean of the Law School chair, one Supreme court
justice, lawyers, appointees [Gov + 1; Speaker = 1; Senate = 1] with public
input, and citizens—15 people in all) to vote candidates “qualified,”
interviewed, and appointed by the Governor. Each appointed judge must
subsequently stand for election in a contested election after being appointed
and serving on the bench—the public gets to decide.
·
RETENTION. Periodically,
judges must be re-approved by voters (57% of the votes in favor of retention)
on the general election ballot. All but 3 judges up for retention have been
approved by voters.
Judicial
candidates are constrained in their campaigns. Can’t ask for campaign money;
can’t know from whom donations come; can’t state personal views on issues
(e.g., abortion, gun rights); can’t address hypothetical cases. They can state
their judicial “philosophy” concerning the Constitution (static or “living”
document). They can address groups within the constraints of the Judicial Code
of Conduct to educate voters on the process.
So how
can voters learn about judicial candidates? The Judicial Performance Evaluation
Commission (http://www.nmjpec.org/) provides some statistics. The
League of Women Voters provides additional insights. Voters can also directly
contact judicial candidates prior to the election and ask about their judicial
philosophy, groups they belong to, view on separation of powers (judicial
activism), views on the Constitution, how they view “the law” (public service,
rule of law)—ASK your questions before being faced with choices at the voting
site. Too many voters “pick” judges based on name, appearance (if pictured in
the news or elsewhere), or whim.
