A Republican concern over the role of political philosophy in choosing judges - or rather the absence of such a role - threatens to derail the appointment of a new Utah Supreme Court justice when the Legislature meets next month. That should not be allowed to happen.
If Gov. Mike Leavitt and some Republican lawmakers are sufficiently unhappy with the lack of political input as part of the nominating process, they can change the process. But the appointment of a needed Supreme Court justice should not be held hostage to that effort.Senators agree that Leonard H. Russon, who was picked by Leavitt from a list of three final candidates, is well-qualified to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Chief Justice Gordon Hall, effective at the end of the year. In fact, any of the three finalists - all judges - had excellent legal qualifications.
So what's the problem? The concern of GOP senators is twofold:
First, that the independent Judicial Nominating Commission that selects the three finalists - from which the governor must choose - excludes the governor from having some influence in getting nominees who share his political philosophy.
Second, that the seven-member nominating body is too much under the influence of the Supreme Court's chief justice and the two lawyers who sit as members. The critics believe that gives the judicial branch of government too big a role in choosing its own judgeships.
Leavitt reportedly would like to see a better mix of women, minorities, conservatives and non-judges among the names being offered by the commission, which may lean toward current judges as candidates for the Supreme Court.
Those concerns can be addressed during the next legislative session without resorting to such threatened tactics as failing to act on the current nomination, or rejecting the nominee - just to force the whole selection process to start over while details of the law are changed.
It's ironic that the choosing of judges - once a highly political process - was made more nonpartisan some years back, partly at the behest of Republicans who tired of Democratic governors making judicial appointments. Now that Republicans have been occupants of the statehouse for several terms, they would like the chance for a little more partisanship.
Nobody wants to get rid of the judicial commission system. GOP leaders just want to fine-tune it to provide an avenue for more political input and less influence from the Supreme Court. However, at this point, clear ideas on how that might be done seem to be lacking - another reason for not delaying confirmation of the new Supreme Court justice.
In view of the present confusion, Utah officials should be careful about what they try to do. For example, one idea already voiced is for the Legislature to be able to remove sitting judges by a two-thirds vote. That's a bad concept.
Besides interfering directly with the judicial branch of government, it would make judges vulnerable to political questions of the moment and that is never wise. Courtroom verdicts must be based on the law, not on the political passions that may be riding high at the time.
Legislators should confirm the Supreme Court nominee and take a cool, careful and deliberate look at the selection process before rushing into any changes they might regret later.