How we choose judges is neither perfect nor devoid of politics. Yet Iowa does it better than many states, where judicial elections attract partisanship, ethical quagmires, and loads of PAC money.

For more than 60 years, Iowa governors have appointed trial and appellate judges from a list of applicants selected by nonpartisan judicial nominating commissions. Such commissions are considered the model process for choosing qualified, impartial judges.

Jeffrey Goodman has served on several judicial nominating committees at both the state and federal level. He is a friend, an attorney, a jury consultant, and now an author, and he’s shedding light on the often-opaque process of choosing judges.

“The Book of Judges: Perspectives from the Bench” contains essays from 66 judges. Goodman said he curated these essays because “those aspiring to serve on the bench deserve a reliable guidebook.” He plans a companion volume that imparts his perspectives on the nomination and selection process.

The book brims with wisdom for would-be judges in its 644 pages. It also offers the public insight into how judges wear their heavy robes: how they approach difficult decisions, learn unfamiliar areas of law, put aside their biases, and approach what retired District Judge Robert J. Blink called “the great unknowns of judging.”

I was particularly interested in how judges climbed to the bench. I suspect if there were elections, many accomplished jurists would have never been chosen.

Susan Christensen, chief justice of the Iowa Supreme Court, and Mary Chicchelly, an Iowa Court of Appeals judge, write of the persistence and perseverance required. Christensen received 14 “no’s” before she was nominated to become an associate district judge. The rejections were gut-punches, she said, that helped her grow into a more qualified candidate.

Colleagues warned Mark Bennett against expecting a nomination to federal judge, since he had no “campaign manager” nor had done anything to help the senator who would choose from more than 70 applicants. In fact, he never met a U.S. senator “until the day of my interview.” Department of Justice attorneys who interviewed him recommended that he change one of his answers if he wanted to be nominated. He didn’t, and he was eventually recommended by Sen. Tom Harkin and nominated by President Clinton.

John Jarvey, former chief U.S. district judge in Iowa’s Southern District, expounds on the questions that judicial candidates should receive, and those they should ignore.

Jarvey goes on to list questions he believes candidates should be able to answer. I liked this one: “What will you do for juries and the public to show them that the system is fair, effective, and efficient?”

Iowa state judges stand for retention, and a few have lost their positions because of controversial decisions. Former Chief Justice Marsha Ternus was voted out of office in 2010 after the Iowa Supreme Court’s Varnum v. Brien decision. That historic ruling said Iowa’s law prohibiting same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. She writes why the court’s unanimous decision was neither difficult nor surprising: Each justice came to his or her own independent decision “without fear, favor, or hope of reward.”

“We focused solely on the governing legal principles and in doing so found that the outcome was an easy decision for our court,” Ternus wrote. “The law guided us, and nothing else mattered.”

I’ve scratched only the surface of this remarkable book. Its insights should guide the next generation of judges and ensure they are worthy of the responsibility.

To find the book: You can purchase a copy of “The Book of Judges” for $99.95 at this site. The net proceeds will go to Iowa Legal Aid.

——-

Lynn Hicks of Des Moines is chief of staff and public information officer at the Polk County Attorney’s Office.