I don’t care who does the electing so long as I do the nominating.
— William “Boss” Tweed, political boss of Tammany Hall
Critics of Kansas Governor Sam Brownback point to his nomination of a confidant to the Kansas Court of Appeals as evidence of politics trumping the — purportedly — merit-based selection process formerly in place.
The previous process, however, was nothing if not political. Its defenders — the state’s legal profession — denied that, but they were in charge of the process.
In fact, the reason that Caleb Stegall, the current nominee, is not already on the bench is politics.
Stegall’s recommendation from Felita Kahrs, a member of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission, highlights both his judicial qualifications and the political challenge he may face as a nominee. Ms. Kahrs previously reviewed Stegall’s application for the Kansas Court of Appeals, and her recommendation says that she found that his “outstanding academic background, his excellent writing ability, and the experience he brings to this position, exceeded and in some cases far surpassed the other applicants.” Even though she believed that he “was one of the top candidates that appeared before the Commission,” she explained, “due to politics, his name was not submitted.”
That’s from National Review Online’s Bench Memos.
And if you’re wondering why so many will criticize this appointment and the new process, well, “hell hath no fury like a lawyer scorned.”