Judicial Confirmation Process Questioned

Nov 20, 2008 by Elizabeth Ziegler

(KCPW News) The Utah Senate flexed its muscles yesterday and blocked Governor Jon Huntsman's nomination of Judge Robert Hilder to the Utah Court of Appeals. The decision has rocked the legal community, and is seen by some as a slap in the governor's face. Lisa Roskelley, spokeswoman for Governor Jon Huntsman, admits the confirmation process was disappointing.

"Governor Huntsman feels like he puts forward the best candidates. The senate has a role in the confirmation of those candidates and they have to do what is appropriate in their role," Roskelley says. "We hope this is not a reflection of a new era of how Senate confirmations are conducted of governor's appointees in the future."

It was the first time a judicial nominee was not confirmed by the Senate since the body took over the process in 2003.

Hilder was widely regarded by attorneys as one of the best district judges in the state. Some are speculating the Senate vote against him will have a chilling effect on the judiciary.  Salt Lake City litigation attorney Randall Edwards says the Senate vote is "sickening," and is an example of a special interest group influencing the judiciary.

"When any group begins to affect the judicial process to the point that a judge, looking at a case, doesn't look at it on the merits, but has to be looking over his shoulder to say: How is this going to potentially harm me politically in the future? How is it going to harm my career? When we get to that point, we've lost judicial independence. We've lost anything having to do with the separation of powers," Edwards says.

Those who supported Hilder's confirmation attributed his defeat to a gun rights e-mail campaign. Many took offense to one of Hilder's rulings and a decision to not install gun lockers in courthouses.

Email to a friendPosted in KCPW Newsroom. Copyright 2009 KCPW