Judge retention

[Blewis11]

One point, if you you vote them all out, the governor just gets to replace them again with who she likes...be careful with the grass is greener on the other side argument and be careful what you wish for. Most of the judges are ok, they are doing the best they can. I know a couple of them and their heart isn't in the wrong place. Specifically, Doug Combs is a great guy, smart judge and proceeded over one of my best friend's weddings. There is one of the civil appeals judges I'm not voting for the retention because I think he is a little shady, but I'm not here to spread rumors about a judge. Anyway, just think about it before you throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[reddog1]

I was almost Jim Edmonsons' Son in law.

I cant figure out why, but the man literally hates me these days.

Ok screw em' I'm voting them all out.

 

[Shadowrider]

You guys are like little kids sticking their hands in the flames and then complaining later that it's hot.

Maybe, but you have to keep in mind that those of us who follow the law have almost ZERO interaction with Judges and know nothing about them. And the system makes it damn nigh impossible to find out anything about them. Factor in the news stories about the ridiculous ruling here and there and it's pretty easy to understand why one would vote to give them the boot.



I wear a size 12.5...

 

[Billybob]

One point, if you you vote them all out, the governor just gets to replace them again with who she likes...be careful with the grass is greener on the other side argument and be careful what you wish for. Most of the judges are ok, they are doing the best they can. I know a couple of them and their heart isn't in the wrong place. Specifically, Doug Combs is a great guy, smart judge and proceeded over one of my best friend's weddings. There is one of the civil appeals judges I'm not voting for the retention because I think he is a little shady, but I'm not here to spread rumors about a judge. Anyway, just think about it before you throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Methods of Judicial Selection: Oklahoma
Judicial Nominating Commissions
Whenever there is a vacancy on the supreme court, the court of criminal appeals, or the court of civil appeals, or an interim vacancy on the district court, the judicial nominating commission submits a list of three nominees to the governor. The governor must appoint one of the nominees to fill the vacancy.

The judicial nominating commission is composed of fifteen members. The commission was established by Article 7B of the Oklahoma Constituiton. The governor appoints one non-lawyer member from each of Oklahoma's six congressional districts. No more than three may be of the same political party. The Oklahoma Bar Association elects one of its members from each congressional district. These commission members serve staggered six year terms. The three remaining members are non-lawyer members-at-large. The speaker of the Oklahoma house of representatives and the Oklahoma senate president pro tempore each appoint one lawyer member-at-large, and the remaining member-at-large is selected by at least eight commission members. Members-at-large serve two year terms. Commission members select a chair who serves for one year.

According to a consitutional amendment approved by voters in 2010, non-laywer members may not have a lawyer in their immediate family.

For more information, see Judicial Merit Selection: Current Status.

 

[Blewis11]

Brain fart...I stand corrected Billy Bob. Judicial Nominating goes through the JNC. My point about who they replace them with still stands though, we have no idea who is going to make it through the JNC and eventually get appointed. They could very easily be better or worse than what we have now. I'm sorry about being late to the party, but what ridiculous ruling is Shadowrider referring to? Are we talking about SQ 766? Because that is a whole other discussion.

I agree with an earlier post, it is very difficult to get quality information about Judges for everyday folks who aren't in the courtroom.

 

[Billybob]

Brain fart...I stand corrected Billy Bob. Judicial Nominating goes through the JNC. My point about who they replace them with still stands though, we have no idea who is going to make it through the JNC and eventually get appointed. They could very easily be better or worse than what we have now. I'm sorry about being late to the party, but what ridiculous ruling is Shadowrider referring to? Are we talking about SQ 766? Because that is a whole other discussion.

I agree with an earlier post, it is very difficult to get quality information about Judges for everyday folks who aren't in the courtroom.

And I agree we have no say in the matter. As for info about judges appellate decisions are on OSCN as well as cases judges had as lawyers.

 

[Lurker66]

Maybe, but you have to keep in mind that those of us who follow the law have almost ZERO interaction with Judges and know nothing about them. And the system makes it damn nigh impossible to find out anything about them. Factor in the news stories about the ridiculous ruling here and there and it's pretty easy to understand why one would vote to give them the boot.



I wear a size 12.5...

your spot on. I wear a 12, im with ya.

 

[Mr10mm]

The Lost Ogle has the best guide for voting on judicial retention.

"We need MORE women on the Supreme Court, because you don’t have to pay them as much as a man."

 

[CHenry]

Fire m all and feed em some fishhead chili.

 

[Werewolf]

All the comments from a large majority here that say they always mark the throw the bum out option yet none ever get the hook.

In the 27 years I've been in OK I too have always voted to toss 'em out on their rears and have never known anyone who didn't also vote the same way.

Has any judge ever been not retained?

Which makes me wonder - as another poster surmised - if the fix is not in?