The judiciary, both at the federal and state levels, plays a pivotal role in shaping public policy that affects us daily. Yet, the processes by which judges are appointed and confirmed often remain shrouded in complexity and formality, leaving many to wonder how much influence they truly have over these crucial decisions. This post dives into the mechanics of judicial appointments, focusing on the federal process, where lifetime appointments are made by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and contrasts it with the selection of judges in California, where voters play a significant role. Understanding these processes is not just a matter of civics—it’s a gateway to recognizing the power that each of us holds in shaping the judiciary that, in turn, influences our daily lives.

Appointment & Confirmation of Federal Judges 

As we discussed in the Understanding the Federal and State Judiciary post, we explored how Article Three of the Constitution governs the appointment, tenure, and payment of Supreme Court justices, and federal circuit and district judges. Federal judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and they serve lifetime appointments. 

Nomination: Article Two, Section Two of the U.S. Constitution requires the president to nominate, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to nominate all federal judges in the judicial branch, which may include vacancies on the Supreme Court, Courts of Appeals, and District Courts. The President’s selection may be influenced by various factors, including the nominee’s legal qualifications, approach to judicial philosophy, and political considerations. The President’s power to appoint federal judges is a key part of their legacy, as the Court’s impact will affect the country long beyond their term in office. 

Senate Judiciary Committee Review: Once the President submits the nomination to the Senate, the nomination is referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Judiciary Committee holds hearings where the nominee testifies and answers questions about their qualifications, judicial philosophy, and past rulings or legal opinions. After the hearings, the committee votes on whether to recommend the nominee to the full Senate. The committee’s recommendation can be positive, negative, or neutral.

Senate Confirmation: If the Judiciary Committee approves the nominee, the nomination is then brought for consideration before the full Senate, where debates and hearings continue about the nominee’s qualification before Senators may vote to confirm a nominee by a simple majority vote. If the Senate confirms the nominee, the President formally appoints the nominee to the judicial position. The new judge then takes the judicial oath of office and begins their duties. Federal judges, once appointed and confirmed, serve lifetime appointments, but may be removed through impeachment. 

Compensation of Federal Judges

Federal judges in the United States receive compensation that varies based on their role within the judiciary. As of 2024, the annual salary for District Court judges is $236,600, while Circuit Court judges earn $279,500. Justices of the Supreme Court receive higher compensation, with Associate Justices earning $298,500, and the Chief Justice earning $316,100 annually. These salaries are determined by Congress and are periodically adjusted to account for inflation and other economic factors.

How California Appellate Justices Are Selected 

Appellate Justices serve 12 year terms, beginning the Monday after January 1 following their election. A person must have practiced law for at least 10 years to be eligible for the bench. As outlined in Article 6 of the California Constitution, Supreme Court Justices are elected at large, while judges of courts of appeals are elected in their districts during elections for Governor. The offices of appellate justices and superior court judges are nonpartisan.

Step 1: Evaluation by the JNE Commission

When a vacancy arises, the Governor must submit potential candidates to the Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation (JNE or “Jenny Commission”). This commission, part of the State Bar of California, comprises 27 to 38 members, primarily lawyers, with at least six non-lawyer members. They assess candidates and rate them as “exceptionally well-qualified,” “well-qualified,” “qualified,” or “not qualified.” However, the Governor is not obligated to follow these recommendations.

Step 2: Nomination by the Governor

After receiving the Commission’s evaluation and concluding the person is qualified for appointment, the Governor may nominate the person to become an appellate or supreme court justice for confirmation by the Commission on Judicial Appointments.

Step 3: Review by the Commission on Judicial Appointments (CJA)

Any candidate nominated or appointed by the Governor to the Supreme Court or a Court of Appeal must be reviewed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments (CJA). The CJA has three members:  the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Attorney General, and the presiding justice in the nominee’s district (or the longest-serving presiding justice in the state for Supreme Court nominees). The CJA holds a public hearing to consider the candidate’s qualifications, and has the authority to reject nominees, although this rarely happens. Once the CJA approves, the nominee is formally appointed. 

Term & Retention Elections 

Appellate justices serve 12-year terms, commencing in early January following their election. The Justice’s term of office depends on when the position became vacant. Justices and judges are subject to retention elections during the first Governor’s election following their appointment, and then every 12 years.  In retention elections, voters simply vote “yes” or “no” to retain the judge. The elections are not contested, and other individuals may not run for the seat. If a majority votes “no,” the judge is not retained, and the Governor appoints a replacement.

The 12 year term attaches to the seat, meaning that when a vacancy occurs, the election cycle does not change for that seat. However, if part of the term was served before the position became vacant, the justice serves the uncompleted part, either four or eight years. At the end of that term, the justice again must be confirmed by the voters at a general election in order to begin a new term.

How Superior Court Judges Are Selected 

Superior court judges run in nonpartisan elections and serve 6 year terms, beginning the Monday after January 1 following their election. If a candidate wins over 50% of the vote, they are elected outright; otherwise, the top two candidates proceed to a runoff.

However, vacancies often arise due to retirements, deaths, or other departures, and the Governor appoints judges to serve the remainder of the term. Any individual who has been a member of the California Bar for the past ten years or a sitting judge for the past ten years can apply to be appointed to the Superior Court. The application process is rigorous, including biographic and demographic questions, essays, and detailed case histories. Candidates for appointment must undergo evaluation by the State Bar’s Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation (JNE) but do not require approval by the Commission on Judicial Appointments. Governor Newsom introduced the Judicial Selection Advisory Committees (JSAC) in 2019, representing various regions such as the Bay Area, Central Coast, and Los Angeles. These committees provide preliminary feedback on candidates for appointment, and influence the Governor’s decision. 

Members of Los Angeles County Judicial Selection Advisory Committee (JSAC)

• Victoria Adams, Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office
• Justice Lamar Baker, California Court of Appeal, Second District
• Madison Fairchild, TransLatin@ Coalition
• Judge Holly Fujie, Los Angeles County Superior Court
• Eric George, Browne George Ross LLP
• Thomas Girardi, Girardi Keese
• Judge Rupa Goswami, Los Angeles County Superior Court
• Judge Dean Hansell, Los Angeles County Superior Court
• Judge Michelle Kim, Los Angeles County Superior Court
• Justice Elwood Lui, California Court of Appeal, Second District
• Justice Carlos Moreno (Ret.), Supreme Court of California
• Luis Rodriguez, Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office
• Roman Silberfeld, Robins Kaplan LLP
• Judge Sergio Tapia, II, Los Angeles County Superior Court
• Judge Bobbi Tillmon, Los Angeles County Superior Court
• Judge Michelle Williams-Court, Los Angeles County Superior Court
• Judge Helen Zukin, Los Angeles County Superior Court

Notice how it is mostly judges, but shout out to our partners at TransLatin@ Coalition for uplifting the community’s voices on state judicial appointments! 

After a candidate for appointment fills out an application, the JSACs represent the first stage of review. They provide preliminary, non-partisan feedback on candidates and help promote a diverse and inclusive nomination process for California’s judiciary. Check out our latest Observer post about Governor Newsom’s July 2024 appointments to the L.A. Superior Courts. 

Election Process for Superior Court Judges

Following a six-year term, if an incumbent judge runs unopposed, their name does not appear on the ballot, and they are automatically re-elected. This means that, so long as a new candidate does not challenge an incumbent judge, they are effectively automatically re-elected and fly under the radar of voter accountability.

The filing fee for a new candidate to declare candidacy is 1% of a judge’s annual salary ($2,000.42 currently), but this can be waived by submitting a petition with 6,002 signatures from registered voters. If a candidate misses the filing deadline but gathers 600 signatures within 10 days, they can run as a write-in candidate, prompting the incumbent judge’s name to appear on the ballot with the write-in option.

YOUR Vote Can Influence the Judiciary

Voters play a critical role in affecting what both the federal and state judicial systems look like. At the federal level, our votes for President and Senate affect who is appointed and confirmed for lifetime appointments in the federal judiciary. By voting for Governor and voting for local judicial candidates, Angelenos can influence who the judges are within our neighborhood courthouses. 

Here’s why your vote matters for everyday policies:

• Judicial Accountability: Regular elections and retention votes ensure that the public can vote a judge out of office or support a judicial candidate who is challenging an incumbent.
• Direct Impact on Local Decisions: Judges make decisions that directly affect community members’ lives, from criminal sentencing to civil disputes.
• Setting Legal Precedents: Appellate and Supreme Court justices establish precedents that guide future legal interpretations and decisions.
• Counterbalance to Special Interests: Public voting serves as a counterbalance to potential corporate or other special interest influence on judicial appointments.

It can feel disempowering to hear news about how recent Supreme Court decisions are affecting everything from reproductive rights, administrative law, presidential power, and so much more!   Yet, as Angelenos, our local and state judiciary have the most immediate effects on our lives. We can vote for executives at the state and federal levels who will appoint judges who align with our values. In California, we have the ability to vote to retain appellate justices, vote for superior court judges, and even contribute to the campaigns of progressive judicial candidates who run for open seats or challenge incumbents. 

Here in Los Angeles, we can get involved in judicial accountability efforts. For example, if you appear before a judge in Los Angeles County, please submit a review on https://la.ratemyjudge.com/ You can also get trained to volunteer with CourtWatch LA to observe hearings in your local courthouse. You have more ability to influence the judiciary than you realize!