1. JUDICIAL SELECTION Common Law Systems: US and England

2. Methods of Judicial Selection in US State Court Selection Systems Legislative or Gubernatorial Appointment Partisan or Nonpartisan Election Merit Plan System Federal Courts Presidential Nomination and Senate Confirmation

3. Method of Judicial Selection in England Old System: Secret Soundings and the Lord Chancellor Constitutional Reform Act of 2005 Reduced role for the Lord Chancellor as a cabinet minister Creation of a Judicial Appointments Commission Appointment by application Recommends one person per vacancy on basis of merit Daylong evaluations replace single interview Special panel selects for Court of Appeals Special panel appointed by PM for Supreme Court vacancies, comprised of Supreme Court and reps from national appointive bodies

4. Judicial Selection: Areas of Comparison Politicization of the Process Degree of democratic accountability Unitary vs. Federal selection systems Efforts to achieve diversity

5. JURIES AND LAYPERSONS Common Law Systems: US and England

6. The Jury: A Shared Tradition with Emerging Differences Introduction after Norman Conquest Functions of a Jury System Use of a Jury Trial: Criminal vs. Civil Juror Selection and Qualifications Eligibility – Should legal officers be allowed to serve? Vetting the Jury – Background search vs. juror questioning Juror Challenges – for cause and peremptory challenges Evaluating Marder’s Recommendations

7. Role of Lay Magistrates in England Preside over the Magstrates’ Courts Evolved from the 14 th Century Justices of the Peace Appointed by Lord Chancellor upon recommendation of local advisory committees Hear nearly all criminal cases in England Mostly middle-classed, middle-aged, leaning conservative Given basic procedural training but rely on the clerks and legal advisor for advice on law and procedure Increasing shift to District Judges for these courts Assessing the value of the use of lay magistrates