Maine’s judicial selections are made the same way today as they were 1819.

The state’s 17 Superior Court and seven Supreme Court justices are appointed by the governor, vetted by committee and confirmed by the state Senate.

The only significant reform to that process was made in 1839 when the Legislature changed the judges’ term length from lifetime to seven years.

Appointing judges isn’t on the list of hot-button issues facing the gubernatorial candidates. However, given the increasingly partisan climate, a justice’s party affiliation or bench record is becoming more relevant. 

It could become more relevant if Maine Democrats lose control of the Senate, or the Blaine House.

In some other states, judicial aspirants already run campaigns much like politicians. In Maryland, where Gov. Martin O’Malley has taken heat for partisan appointments, justices are first appointed and then run elections to retain their seats. 

Of course, just because Maine’s justices don’t run campaigns doesn’t mean their politics aren’t already a consideration. Judiciary appointments are made the same way as commissioners are to the Department of Economic and Community Development or the Department of  Conservation, two agencies recently headed by former Democratic state legislators who launched gubernatorial bids in 2009.

Given that track record, will the next governor appoint justices based on party affiliation or their perceived ideologies? The candidates were asked that question. Here are their answers.

Eliot Cutler, 64, independent

Cutler said judiciary appointments should be based on a judge’s understanding of the law and a willingness to abide by the law.

“I consider the judiciary, whether it’s federal or state, to be as unpolitical as possible,” he said.

John Jenkins, 58, independent

Jenkins said his appointments wouldn’t be political, but he’d ask justices to consider the desires of a community before handing down decisions, particularly those in criminal cases.

“I would not look at their past record, so much as have a conversation (with them),” said Jenkins, to ask them to consider lesser penalties for nonviolent crimes. “Too many times we’re too quick to throw away the keys on people.”

Paul LePage, 61, Republican

LePage said he would never refuse to appoint or reappoint a justice based on his or her ideology.

“To me, the thing that’s really important is if they have a good argument, a good process,” LePage said. “I don’t care what a person’s ideology is. Are they going to give the people they serve the very best process? That’s what I want to know.”

LePage said his main problem with the judiciary system is that it lacks transparency and that some justices are reluctant to “admit they’d made mistakes.”

Libby Mitchell, 70, Democrat

Mitchell said politics or philosophy wouldn’t influence her appointments. However, their “judicial behavior” would.

“In all the time I’ve been in the Legislature, only one judge hasn’t been reappointed,” she said. “It was because of the way he treated attorneys and people before his bench. It wasn’t because of his decisions, it was because of his behavior toward people who found themselves in the unfortunate position of being in court.”

Shawn Moody, 51, independent

Moody said he would “absolutely” make appointments based on a justice’s track record, particularly if he sensed decisions were being made “for political outcomes.”

However, as a “lifelong” independent, Moody said he would never make appointments based on party affiliation.

“We need to get at the root of the problems,” he said. “We don’t need politics in our justice system.”

Kevin Scott, 42, independent

Scott said he would consult with other seated justices before making appointments.

“I would really look to them to make that short list,” he said.

Tomorrow: Our final question: We ask the candidates how they would handle health care in Maine.

Copy the Story Link