Viewpoint: Missouri's Non-Partisan Court Plan -- A model for the nation

Missouri is, of course, known as the "Show-Me State." Some 66 years ago, Missourians showed the nation a pioneering method for minimizing politics from the selection of judges: the Non-Partisan Court Plan. It remains, by any reasonable analysis, the most effective way of ensuring that judges remain as separate as possible from politics.

In 1940, in response to the corruption evident within the political machines that controlled elections in St. Louis and Kansas City, Missourians approved a constitutional amendment creating the Non-Partisan Court Plan for the state's appellate courts (the Supreme Court of Missouri and the Missouri Court of Appeals) as well as trial courts in Jackson County, St. Louis County and the City of St. Louis. Over the ensuing years, two other counties -- Platte County and Clay County -- opted into the plan.

Here's how the plan works: When a judicial vacancy occurs in any of the courts covered by the Non-Partisan Court Plan, a judicial nominating commission -- composed of lawyers, judges and private citizens -- interviews candidates who have applied for the opening and selects the three most qualified individuals. These three names are then submitted to the governor, who must select one of those three individuals. At the first election following appointment by the governor, the judge must go before the voters. However, instead of running against another candidate, they simply run on their record as a judge. Voters are asked whether the judge should be retained. If a judge does not receive a majority of the votes, his or her judicial office becomes vacant and the process begins again.

Why is The Missouri Bar such a strong advocate for the Non-Partisan Court Plan? The answer is quite simple: The plan is a proven method of selecting judicial applicants based on merit and skills, not political connections and the ability to raise money for election campaigns. For example:

Since being introduced in Missouri, the Non-Partisan Court Plan -- known nationally as "the Missouri plan" -- has been adopted, in whole or in part, in more than 30 other states. Nothing is more eloquent testimony to its value and effectiveness.

The Non-Partisan Court Plan engenders public confidence in the courts by effectively removing politics from the selection and retention of judges.

Highly-qualified applicants -- our state's "best and brightest" -- are more willing to apply for openings on the bench because they seek a career based upon their competence and their understanding of the law, not based on politics.

Only qualified individuals will be selected for the bench, because the judicial nominating commissions nominate the three best candidates.

Judges chosen under the Non-Partisan Court Plan don't find themselves presiding over cases involving attorneys or litigants who gave them campaign contributions, avoiding the perception that justice can be bought.

Missouri's economy benefits because of the Non-Partisan Court Plan. Companies and businesses interested in building new plants or investing in the state want a justice system where the rule of law is applied fairly and predictably by qualified judges who follow the law. Thus, in addition to providing for stability, continuity and promotion of public confidence in the judiciary, the Non-Partisan Court Plan fosters a convenient, fair justice system sought by the business community.

As compelling as the above arguments are, further proof of the Non-Partisan Court Plan's value is reflected in the experiences of those states that have not yet implemented merit selection for their judges. For example, individual lawyers in Texas have given in excess of $100,000 to candidates for that state's Supreme Court. In Ohio, the campaign for election of the Chief Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court cost well in excess of $2 million. And just two years ago in our neighboring state, Illinois, the two candidates for a state Supreme Court seat raised more than $8 million as part of an ugly and contentious campaign. Much of that money was spent on television commercials that stained the image of the courts in that state. Now, after those elections, people are openly questioning whether those judges can be truly impartial when major donors appear before them as litigants.

These examples clearly illustrate the dangers involved in large-scale partisan election campaigns that involve mud-slinging and the need to raise campaign contributions. Regardless of the true character of any individual judge, the mere perception that a judge's integrity may be compromised is enough to cause any litigant to wonder if justice will be dispensed fairly.

Is that the impression we want to leave of our justice system? That the rule of law and the right to a fair trial are secondary to partisan political considerations? That is not the type of justice system the citizens of Missouri deserve, and that is why The Missouri Bar supports the Non-Partisan Court Plan.

Douglas A. Copeland is president of the Missouri Bar.