The rule of law paradigm has long operated on the premise that independent judges disregard extralegal influences and impartially uphold the law. A political transformation several generations in the making, however, has imperiled this premise. Social science learning, the lessons of which have been widely internalized by court critics and the general public, has shown that judicial decision-making is subject to ideological and other extralegal influences. In recent decades, challenges to the assumptions underlying the rule of law paradigm have proliferated across a growing array of venues, as critics agitate for greater political control of judges and courts. With the future of the rule of law paradigm in jeopardy, this book proposes a new way of looking at how the role of the American judiciary 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 is subject to political and other extralegal influences. The book argues that 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" (less rigidly conceived), respect established legal process, and administer justice.

About the Author
Charles Gardner Geyh is the John F. Kimberling Professor of Law at the Indiana University Maurer School of Law. His work on judicial independence, accountability, selection, administration and ethics has appeared in over sixty books, articles, book chapters and reports.

Reviews
Geyh wades into the age-old question of how best to select and retain state court judges. It is a divisive issue that arises whenever there are judicial scandals or court decisions on which the citizenry is deeply divided. Geyh presents an invaluable analysis of the pros and cons of each system and defuses many of the traditional arguments for and against systemic change. A must-read for those interested in preserving public confidence in our state court judiciaries. * Edward W. Madeira, Jr., Esq., former Chairman of the American Bar Association Commissions on the 21st Century Judiciary, State Judicial Selection Standards, and Separation of Powers and Judicial Independence, and an ABA John Marshall Award recipient *
Brilliant intellectualism at its core, Who is to Judge? is an expertly crafted discussion of the state judicial selection controversy, in which Geyh denounces stridency while embracing both normative ideals and empirical research. An exceptional contribution, this book is a rare yet outstanding example of how to transcend disciplinary divides, bridge the gap between science and practical politics, and offer constructive solutions the nation's most enduring debates. * Melinda Gann Hall, Professor of Political Science at Michigan State University and author of Attacking Judges *
Charlie Geyh is at it again-and we should all be thankful that he is! Weighing in once more, the author of 'Why Judicial Elections Stink' has given us his revisionist, evidence-based views on how state judges in this country ought to be selected and retained. Truly outstanding scholarship, irrespective of whether one is for or against electing judges. Who is to Judge is not just erudite - the inimitable 'Geyh writing-style' is fun to read as well. Few legal academics have engaged the social science literature on judicial elections at the level that Geyh does. A definitive and essential contribution to our debates. * James L. Gibson, Sidney W. Souers Professor of Government, Washington University in St. Louis *



Book Information
ISBN 9780190233495
Author Charles Gardner Geyh
Format Hardback
Page Count 216
Imprint Oxford University Press Inc
Publisher Oxford University Press Inc
Weight(grams) 431g
Dimensions(mm) 160mm * 236mm * 25mm