Who is to Judge?: Charles Gardner Geyh
An elected judiciary is virtually unique to the American experience and creates a paradox in a representative democracy. Elected judges take an oath to uphold the law impartially, which calls upon them to swear off the influence of the very constituencies they must cultivate in order to attain and retain judicial office. This paradox has given rise to perennially shrill and unproductive binary arguments over the merits and demerits of elected and appointed judiciaries, which this project seeks to transcend and reimagine. In Who Is to Judge?, judicial politics expert Charles Gardner Geyh exposes and explains the overstatements of both sides in the judicial selection debate. When those exaggerations are understood as such, it becomes possible to search for common ground and its limits. Ultimately, this search leads Geyh to conclude that, while appointive systems are a preferable default, no one system of selection is best for all jurisdictions at all times.
- Engages the popular debate on judge selection but argues that both sides are wrong, in pursuit of a moderated position between the poles
- Brings history, political science, psychological science, and law to bear in an interdisciplinary analysis of the issues
- Presents these ideas in a smart yet informal writing style that will be accessible for students and general readers
Oxford University Press
New York, NY
Judges-Selection and appointment-United States.
Courts | Judges | Law
Geyh, Charles G., "Who is to Judge?: Charles Gardner Geyh" (2019). Books by Maurer Faculty. 204.