Judicial Systems and Elections: A Comparative Analysis Report

This report provides a comparative analysis of judicial systems and elections in the United States, specifically focusing on the differences between state and federal courts. It examines the election processes in Texas, where partisan primaries are used to select judges, and the methods used in Michigan, where non-partisan elections are common. The report also outlines the process of appointing federal judges, from the initial vacancy to Senate confirmation, highlighting the role of the home state senators, the Justice Department's vetting process, and the Senate vote. The report emphasizes the importance of the Senate's role in confirming nominees, either through a simple majority or unanimous consent, and provides references to support the analysis. The report is a comprehensive overview of the judicial systems and election processes in the United States.

Running head: SOCIETY, LAW AND THE GOVERNMENT
1
Society, Law and the Government
Name
Institution

SOCIETY, LAW AND THE GOVERNMENT 2
In the United State, we have two major court systems; first, we have the federal court which is
concerned with giving verdicts on cases from different states normally involving their parties or
constitutional rights. Secondly we have the state courts which are concerned with those cases
involving the laws of the state and those cases that do not fall within federal courts’ jurisdiction.
In Texas, partisan primaries are what they use in their elections for judges, where by democratic
and republican get into a competition (Pope, 2014). The opportunity of representing their party in
the general elections is what they compete for.
In the Michigan state the Supreme Court candidates are normally nominated and this is done
at party conventions (Fino, 2011). However, it is through non-partisan elections that judges of
the circuit court and court of appeal are selected.
The entire process from vacancy to confirmation of a federal judge can take a year or even
months. First the vacancy occurs and the home state senators are consulted by the white house.
These senators represent that state that will soon have a vacancy position and in need of a judge.
A thorough vetting is conducted and it is normally done by carrying out all possible research on
a candidate’s background. This investigation is normally done by the justice department and is
extended to the candidate’s lawyer, his legal qualifications, reputation, employment history and
written record. This also involves multiple interviews with the candidates. At a point the senate
then votes to confirm a nominee and lastly a lifetime appointment begin.
The most persuasive point in the final selection of judges is during the senate vote to confirm
the nominee. This is either done successfully invoking closure where the confirmation of the
nominee is through a simple majority of senators or either by unanimous consent.

SOCIETY, LAW AND THE GOVERNMENT 3
References
Fino, A. P. (2011). The Michigan State Constitution. New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Pope, J. (2014). Common Law Judge: Selected Writings of Chief Justice Jack Pope of Texas.