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

Representative Democratic Model- Selectable Offices

Part Twenty-Eight

The Filling Of Vacancies For State Trial Court Judges:

If a state trial court judge cannot complete that term for any reason (removal, retirement, resignation, or death), then the deputy state trial court judge, who had already been pre-selected by a State Governor (current or former) at the beginning of that State Trial Court Judge's term, serves as Substitute Trial Court Judge till the end of the next State Senate session. That Substitute Trial Court Judge is not allowed to be selected by the current State Governor as Acting State Trial Court Judge.

If the term of the vacated trial court judge expires at the time of the start of the next State Senate session, the State Governor nominates an eligible individual for Trial Court Judge and then the State Senate provides confirmation of such candidate with a majority vote by its members, provided quorum limits are met. The State Vice-Governor can vote to break a tie in the confirmation vote.

If the term of the vacated Trial Court Judge expires after the end of the next State Senate session, the State Governor unilaterally selects the Acting State Trial Court Judge to serve the remainder of the term of his/her predecessor. After completion of that term, he/she is then subject to nomination by the State Governor and confirmation by the State Senate if he/she desires to become the State Trial Court Judge for the entire next new term.

The local legislature or the local head executive should not get involved in the selection of an Acting State Trial Court Judge. It would demonstrate direct democratic mode as involvement by too many government bodies means too much political interference. In addition, since the local government is closest to the People, their participation in this selection would be unwarranted as the choosing of any acting officeholder has to be more non-political than the choosing of an officeholder.

Substitute trial court judges are not allowed to be nominated by the State Governor for Acting State Trial Court Judge. This would demonstrate Imperial Democratic Mode if the Substitute Trial Court Judge was allowed to serve as Acting State Trial Court Judge and perhaps even as State Trial Court Judge. No State Governor should be given the authority to have his/her choice for a substitute trial court judge to serve beyond that role. Otherwise that authority would be considered Imperialistically Democratic.

Cliff Notes Version: The Substitute Trial Court Judge (already pre-selected by the State Governor) serves till the end of the next State Senate session. After the next legislative session, if the term of the vacated trial court judge has not expired, another individual that the Governor selected to serve as Acting State Trial Court Judge does so until the end of that vacated trial court judge's term.

If the term of the state trial court judge expires at the start of the next state legislative session, another individual eligible for the State Trial Court Judge (not the Acting) is nominated by the State Governor and then is confirmed by the State Senate.

Upon the expiration of this vacated State Trial Court Judge's term, the current Acting State Trial Court Judge can become the State Trial Court Judge provided he/she is nominated by the State Governor and then is confirmed by the State Senate.

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 allowing substitute judges to serve beyond that capacity is Democratic Imperialism. This is due to the fact that this would give the State Governor too much authority. Allowing an acting judge to not be subject to the nomination and confirmation process is also Imperial Democratic mode. This should be disallowed.