Search Results

The introduction begins with the rule of law paradigm, which has long operated on the premise that independent judges disregard extralegal influences and uphold the law. In recent decades, however, challenges to that premise have proliferated, as critics agitate for greater political control of judges and courts. With the rule of law paradigm beginning to crumble, this book proposes a new way of looking at how judicial decision-making should be conceptualized and regulated. This new, “legal culture paradigm” defends the need for an independent judiciary that is acculturated to take law seriously, but which is subject to extralegal influences. These extralegal influences cannot be eliminated but can be managed, by balancing the needs for judicial independence and accountability across competing perspectives, to the end of enabling judges to follow the law, respect established legal process, and administer justice.

Chapter 8 summarizes six major points: (1) the rule of law paradigm has structured our conception of the American judiciary for centuries; (2) The landscape of the American courts is changing in ways that are causing the rule of law paradigm to crumble; (3) A legal culture paradigm better explains the need for judicial independence and accountability among judges whose decisions are subject to legal and extralegal influences; (4) The legal culture paradigm explains the changing landscape of the American courts in terms of a shift toward intensified regulation of judges in the political dimension of oversight. (5). Fifth, this shift is problematic because there is value to maintaining three distinct dimensions of oversight in constructive tension; (6) Balance between the dimensions of oversight can be restored through education, reclamation, and moderation. The chapter then anticipates and addresses core concerns that readers may have about the foregoing six points.

Chapter 7 then brings the book to conclusion by discussing the future of judicial selection. After summarizing the discussions in the previous six chapters, it notes that the ultimate ambition of a legal culture paradigm is to render judges independent enough to follow the law, adhere to the established legal process, and administer justice, without being so independent as to enable them to disregard those objectives in pursuit of their personal agendas. To that end, the chapter indicates that rather than trying to achieve an impossible consensus, the country should embrace the diversity of approaches that allows states to choose for themselves which selection process best suits their individual historical and other circumstances, whether that be appointive, elective, or something in-between such as a qualified election.