The following column is the opinion and analysis of the writer.
Last week, Gov. Doug Ducey once again carried out his constitutional duty by filling a vacancy on the Arizona Supreme Court.
Citizens across Arizona — including the Democratic sheriff of Maricopa County — lauded the governor’s appointment of a highly qualified candidate — a stellar prosecutor, a West Point graduate and veteran, and county attorney for one of the largest counties in the nation.
The widely praised appointment reflects the many checks and balances inherent in Arizona’s decades old, voter-approved system for selecting judges — one that is broadly recognized as a model for the nation.
Here’s why:
For starters, members appointed to the Commission on Appellate Court Appointments — the commission that selects the pool of candidates from which the governor ultimately appoints a justice — aren’t simply appointed on a whim.
On the contrary, the criteria for appointing members to this commission are carefully laid out in our state’s Constitution.
The criteria ensure that judges are not simply appointed (as in the federal system) but are nominated to the governor by a wide and diverse representation of our state’s citizens.
The Constitution requires that five attorneys be appointed to the commission as well as 10 non-attorneys. There are strict standards for how many commission members from each of these categories can reside in the same county and be from the same political party.
All commission members appointed by Ducey met these requirements each and every time that an appointment was made to the commission.
To ensure thorough vetting of commission members, the Constitution provides roles for the Arizona Senate and the state bar in their selection. As an example of the diversity this process affords, the commission currently includes several veterans, a mother who was the first in her family to attend college, a retiree, a public lawyer and private attorneys, to name a few. They hail from Southern Arizona, Northern Arizona and everywhere in between.
Each of these commissioners is an Arizona citizen who has volunteered and taken time out of his or her life to research each of the judicial applications, the applicants’ references and any concerns raised about the potential judicial nominees.
Rather than being maligned, the commission should be commended for the amount of diligence that went into the selection process. The commissioners approach their duties with unmatched seriousness and operate with the utmost concern for the integrity of the process.
Unfortunately, as they set politics aside, others have sought to inject politics back into the process by attacking their independence and judgment.
Far from “degrading Arizona’s judicial institutions,” an honest and sober examination of Ducey’s record of judicial appointments reveals one that reflects the rich diversity of background and experience in our state — perhaps more so than any governor of any political party in recent decades.
To date, approximately 37% of Ducey’s appointed justices have been female. That’s a higher rate of women judges appointed by any governor in at least 20 years, including Govs. Jan Brewer, Janet Napolitano and Jane Hull.
Ducey also appointed a higher rate of judges who were not of his own party than any of his three predecessors.
When it comes to Arizona’s highest court, Ducey appointed Arizona’s first and second Hispanic justices — John Lopez and James Beene — and the first independent to serve on the court — Clint Bolick.
As for our lower courts, Judge Maria Elena Cruz on Division I of the Court of Appeals previously served as a respected judge for the Cocopah Indian Tribe. Judge Suzanne Marwil was the first disabled student to attend Yale Law School. Judge Melissa Iyer Julian is the daughter of immigrants from India and Mexico. Judge Chuck Whitehead is an African-American who grew up in a single-parent household. Judge Scott MacDonald raised a child with disabilities while juggling his legal career.
All were appointed by Ducey.
These judges represent Republicans, Democrats and independents, both left- and right-leaning, nominated by Arizona’s Commission on Appellate Courts and Trial Court Commissions, before being appointed by Ducey.
All of these facts considered, it’s important to remember that the responsibility of any governor is to select judicial appointees based not on characteristics of race, gender or political affiliation, but rather on merit.
Today, Arizona’s merit-based system for selecting judges garners praise from across the nation. And for good reason.
Not only does it stand as a model of appointing judges who are best for the job, but with its many checks and balances and high standards for diversity enshrined in our Constitution, it also produces judges of exceptional quality.
That is a fact in which all Arizonans can take pride.
