why was partisanship in texas judicial elections not an issue until 1978?

In 1978, the Texas judicial system underwent a major overhaul. The 1970s were an exciting time for the state of Texas and its citizens that would last until 1978 when this change occurred. In order to understand why partisanship was not an issue in these elections, we need to first discuss what led up to it happening.

The post goes on from here..

I. What led up to partisanship becoming an issue in Texas judicial elections?

II. Was there any opposition of a partisan stance for judges?

II. How did the change in 1978 affect the judiciary system and what will happen if this is not fixed now?

IV. Who’s idea was it originally, how does one become appointed, and why do we need them at all?

II. Was there any opposition of a partisan stance for judges?

Yes, the Democratic Party opposed to taking up legislation that would remove judicial elections from party primaries and instead have them on state general election ballots in November. They also supported retention elections with nonpartisan candidates as an alternative to abolishing the primary system entirely.

The post goes on from here about how partisanship has impacted judicial proceedings since 1978 and why it should be changed back or improved before anything worse happens!

The last two sentences are: “Partisanship can’t continue to be an issue like it used too because we need impartiality.”

“The post goes on from here about how partisanship has impacted judicial proceedings since 1978 and why it should be changed back or improved before anything worse happens!”

The post goes on from here about how partisanship has impacted judicial proceedings since 1978 and why it should be changed back or improved before anything worse happens!

Partisanship can’t continue to be an issue like it used too because we need impartiality.

In the United States of America, few constitutional rights are more sacred than that of trial by jury. It is a right enshrined in our very founding documents: The Declaration of Independence proclaims “[a]ll men . . . endowed with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” while Article II states “the Trial [of all Crimes except impeachment], both in Law and Equity shall be “by Jury.”

The issue with this is that the people who are deciding these cases aren’t impartial. The Supreme Court of Texas, for instance, has been made up of six Republicans and three Democrats since it was founded in 1852–with one brief exception. That’s an imbalance we can no longer tolerate because justice requires balance as well!

If you’re reading this thinking I’m trying to say that judges should be partisan too then please stop right now–just think about how much worse things will get if all parties have a stake in the outcome. We need impartiality so badly right now but there needs to be better ways to achieve it than what happened before 1978.

Partisanship had long been absent from judicial elections in Texas. This is because, until 1978, partisan affiliation had been a requirement for judicial candidacy and judges were elected without opposition on nonpartisan ballots that ensured equal representation of the major political parties.

The issue with this is that the people who are deciding these cases aren’t impartial. The Supreme Court of Texas, for instance, has been made up of six Republicans and three Democrats since it was founded in 1852–with one brief exception. That’s an imbalance we can no longer tolerate because justice requires balance as well! If you’re reading this thinking I’m trying to say that judges should be partisan too then please stop right now–just think about how much worse things will get if all parties have a stake in the outcome. We need to do something drastic to level the playing field.

And that’s why I’m proud to be a part of this fight for fair judicial elections in Texas! Join us and let our voices be heard because society needs people who care about justice–not just those who care about winning.

A new report from the Brennan Center for Justice reveals that partisan politics in Texas judicial elections is on the rise, and it’s a problem–especially because we’re seeing more reports of judges making political decisions when they shouldn’t be doing so. In 1978, partisanship was not an issue with texas judicial elections at all because republicans were willing to step down if democrats won by “too much.” But now? The Supreme Court of Texas has been made up of six Republicans and three Democrats since 1852–with one brief exception. That’s an imbalance we can no longer tolerate because justice requires balance too! If you’re reading this thinking I’m trying to say that judges should also be partisan then please stop reading now. I’m trying to say that we need more balance in the supreme court of Texas–and if one party dominates, then they’re going to prioritize their own interests over others’.

There’s a way to get this balance though: have judicial elections take place during general election day and do away with all primaries. This is what Australia does too so it works! All judges will be on the ballot because there are no primary ballots anymore which means voters can see who each candidate is before casting their vote on November third (or however many days til your state has an election). And when candidates run for office together? They’ll only focus on making sure they win as opposed to attacking other parties!

If partisanship was not an issue in 1978, why was it an issue by 1986?

This is a good question. It’s likely because of we think it could be related to education. If there’s no diversity or balance for those who have children in school, then they will work with policies only focusing on what helps them instead of everyone else too which affects everything from criminal justice to education policy topics.

If partisanship was not an issue in 1978, why was it an issue by 1986?

What does this mean for voters and the electorate? Well even though people might want their “party” candidate to win, when you let all candidates speak openly about their values and beliefs (without any fear that attacking other parties will get them elected), people are more informed before casting their vote! And as long as candidates don’t misrepresent themselves, then they will be held accountable by the voters at the ballot box.

Why was partisanship an issue in 1978?

Partisanship started to become a big factor in judicial elections starting around 1986 because of changes that were happening with Texas education during this time. If there’s no diversity or balance for those who have children in school, then they will work with policies only focusing on what helps them instead of everyone else too which affects everything from criminal justice to education policy topics. Stay tuned and we’ll talk more about it next week!

What does this mean for voters and the electorate? Well even though people might want their “party” candidate to win, when you let all candidates speak openly