American judicial selection shifted over time with alternating independence and accountability values

Evidence

On the one hand, we want judges to be independent and impartial. On the other hand, we want all officials who exercise power to be responsive to public sentiment and accountable for their actions. Over the course of the nation’s history, Americans have alternated between these two perspectives, and changes in the mode of selecting state judges have reflected this alternation. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 370

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Judicial selection systems reflect successive eras of political reform since 1789 — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 407; Judicial selection reform moved historically from partisan to nonpartisan elections to merit selection — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 409; Merit selection transforms rather than removes politics from judicial selection — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 439 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Selection-system shifts trace the alternating ideals of independence and accountability. #corroborates (0.96) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 370
• Merit selection transforms rather than removes politics from judicial selection #complicates (0.82) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 439
• Judicial independence advocates favor insulated selection and long tenure #expands (0.78) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 589
• Demographic representation is a third competing value in judicial selection #qualifies (0.74) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 591