Earlier this week, Gov. Ned Lamont signed into law House Bill 7041, a bill which the People’s Parity Project (PPP) claims gives the state “the most transparent judicial nominations process in the nation,” per a statement released by the group.
“Connecticut is now leading the way across the nation in advancing a judicial system that is more transparent and accountable to the people it serves,” said Molly Coleman, PPP’s Executive Director.
PPP is “a movement of law students and attorneys organizing for a democratized legal system which empowers working people and opposes subordination in any form,” according to their website.
In 2022, the group released a report that studied the professional backgrounds of Connecticut’s judges, finding that the majority of state judges, about 60%, had experience primarily as corporate lawyers or criminal prosecutors, while only 11% had experience as public defenders or legal aids.
The bill makes changes to the structure and reporting requirements of the state’s Judicial Selection Commission, which recommends what judges should be considered by the Governor for nomination to the state’s Superior, Appellate and Supreme Courts. PPP lauded the bill for a stipulation requiring the Commission to disclose the professional backgrounds of both its recommended and rejected nominees in its annual report to the Judiciary Committee.
“For years, we have been advocating for more state judges who come from public defense, legal aid, labor and civil rights backgrounds – this critically important new law will finally lift the veil on who is making decisions that impact virtually every aspect of our lives,” said Steve Kennedy, PPP’s Organizing and Network Director. “This law could be the starting point for more judicial transparency across the country.”
In written testimony submitted by Kennedy in support of the bill, he cited several studies that support the notion that a judge’s legal background can serve as a predictor of how they’ll rule once given a seat on the bench.
“Empirical studies have shown that judges’ professional backgrounds can have significant impacts on the outcomes of the cases before them–and on the people that the coalition represents,” wrote Kennedy, in PPP’s written testimony. “Former corporate attorneys and prosecutors were also found to side with corporations over their employees in employment disputes such as discrimination and wage theft cases. Another study right here in Connecticut showed that former corporate attorneys and prosecutors are also harder on renters in eviction cases than other judges.”
While PPP supports the inclusion of legal backgrounds in the Commission’s reports, written testimony reflects that they do not support the bill’s change of the Commission’s structure. The bill stipulates that going forward the Commission, which used to be made up of six lawyers and six non-lawyers, will now consist of eight lawyers (who now must serve a minimum of 10 years) and four non-lawyers.
“We believe that having significant non-lawyer feedback in the judicial selection process is important and should be maintained,” wrote Kennedy. “You do not need a law degree to evaluate a person’s experience and temperament, or to confirm their statutory eligibility to hold office, and you certainly do not need ten years of legal practice to do so.”
Was this article helpful?
Topics on this page
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
