The State Journal editorial board, as part of its 2008 agenda, recommends that Wisconsin replace its Supreme Court elections with a merit selection system for choosing justices.

Good merit selection systems choose justices by their qualifications rather than their ability to raise money, which makes them beholden to their donors, and their expertise at waging campaigns, which too often are disgraceful.  

Under the best forms of merit selection, an independent committee of lawyers and non-lawyers is chosen by a variety of non-political and political sources. The committee seeks out and reviews candidates, evaluating them according to competence, impartiality and fairness.

The committee recommends a short list of finalists to the governor or another appointing authority, who is required to make the appointment from the list, which is made public.

Justices are held accountable for their performance in one of two ways. Either the selection committee conducts periodic re-evaluations with the right to remove a poor-performing justice, or voters decide if the justice should be retained in an up-or-down, uncontested election at the end of the term.

The process better assures impartial justice and restores public trust in the courts.