Representative Democratic Model- Selectable Offices Part Twenty-Seven The Filling Of Vacancies For State Appellate Court Judges:

Representative Democratic Model- Selectable Offices

Part Twenty-Seven

The Filling Of Vacancies For State Appellate Court Judges:

If a state appellate court judge cannot complete that term for any reason (removal, retirement, resignation, or death), then the House Of Delegates/Assembly Speaker selects the Substitute Appellate Court Judge out of a pool of substitute judges who are serving or have served as such at either the trial or appellate levels.

If the term of the vacated State Appellate Court Judge expires at the time the State Senate session takes place, the State Vice-Governor nominates and the State House of Assembly/Delegates confirms another individual for State Appellate Court Judge.

If the term of the vacated State Appellate Court Judge has not expired at the next State Senate session, the State Governor unilaterally selects the Acting State Appellate Court Judge who will serve till the end of that term. The Substitute State Appellate Judge is not eligible to ever serve as Acting or Actual State Appellate Court Judge.

The Acting State Appellate Court Judge should be subject to nomination by State Vice-Governor and then by confirmation by the State House of Assembly/Delegates if he/she desires to remain on that bench upon completion of the term that the vacated State Appellate Court Judge was scheduled to serve. If confirmed by the State House of Assembly/Delegates, the Acting State Appellate Court Judge becomes the State Appellate Court Judge for the entire next new term.

The State Vice-Governor (President Of The State Senate) or the state legislatures should not get involved in the selection of an Acting State Appellate Court Judge. It would demonstrate direct democratic mode as involvement by too many government bodies means too much political interference.

The choosing of any acting officeholder has to be more non-political than the choosing of an officeholder. A State Appellate Court Judge, in his/her attempts to serve the first term, should have to be both nominated and confirmed. However an individual initially serving as Acting State Appellate Court Judge only needs to be selected by the Governor to serve the remaining term of the vacated State Appellate Court Judge.

A substitute state appellate court judge is barred from serving as both Acting and as Actual State Appellate Court Judge. Otherwise the lack of this ban would precipitate Democratic Imperialism due to the fact centralization of power would result. An individual serving in multiple roles would be considered Imperial Democratic Mode.

Allowing the Acting State Appellate Court Judge to serve longer than the remaining term without nomination and confirmation is also demonstrating Imperial Democratic Mode.

Cliff Notes Version: The State House Speaker chooses the substitute for state appellate court judge. After that the State Governor finds another individual to serve as Acting State Appellate Court Judge till the end of the next legislative session.

Only the State Governor should select the Acting State Appellate Court Judge. At the time of nomination and confirmation, the Acting State Appellate Court Judge can become the State Appellate Court Judge upon completed of the vacated State Appellate Court Judge's term.

The choosing of any acting officeholder has to be more non-political than the choosing of an officeholder. Involvement from too many government bodies means direct democratic mode. This means too much political interference. However, insufficient involvement by government bodies breeds Imperial Democratic Mode.