With the November 7 general election approaching, the Philadelphia Bar Association Commission on Judicial Selection and Retention has released its recommendations for Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas and Philadelphia Municipal Court judges seeking to be retained for another 10 year term in their current positions on the bench.
“Our Commission members and investigative volunteers have worked diligently to consider the qualifications of each retention candidate in light of their performance on the bench,” Chancellor Marc Zucker said. “We encourage voters to use our ratings for both first-time and retention candidates as a guide in order to ensure that qualified candidates are elected in November.”
The 2023 recommendations for candidates seeking retention are as follows:
Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas
Recommended: Hon. Jacqueline Allen, Hon. Giovanni Campbell, Hon. Ramy I. Djerassi, Hon. Joseph L. Fernandes, Hon. Timika Lane, Hon. Joseph Scott O’Keefe, Hon. Paula Patrick, Hon. Sierra L. Thomas, and Hon. Nina Wright-Padilla
Not Recommended: Hon. Anne Marie Coyle
Philadelphia Municipal Court
Recommended: Hon. Marissa J. Brumbach, Hon. William A. Meehan Jr., Hon. Bradley Moss, Hon. David Shuter, Hon. Karen Simmons, Hon. Marvin L. Williams and Hon. Matthew Wolf
The Judicial Commission previously evaluated judicial candidates seeking a first term on the Court of Common Pleas, Municipal Court or seats on statewide appellate courts in 2023. In the May Democratic primary, only Court of Common Pleas and Municipal Court candidates rated “Highly Recommended” and “Recommended” earned spots on the November ballot. This is the third election year in a row that only “Highly Recommended” and “Recommended” candidates won spots on the November ballot for the Court of Common Pleas.
The Judicial Commission, which has been issuing judicial candidate recommendations for more than 40 years, is made up of 36 members from a diverse set of legal and community organizations, including members of the judiciary, affinity groups and bar leaders. In 2023, nearly 140 volunteers aided the Commission’s work by serving on the investigative teams that are assigned to evaluate each candidate.
After submitting an extensive questionnaire and writing samples, judicial candidates are assigned an investigative team that conducts the due diligence process. This year, the teams spent at least 1,900 hours evaluating 42 candidates (some of whom ultimately opted not to pursue election.) Candidates for retention submit similar materials, and the Commission polls the legal community regarding the performance and character of each retention candidate. Upon review of the polling results, the Commission determines which candidates for retention, if any, warrant a complete investigation.
Each of the five-person investigative teams conducted a minimum of 20 interviews about each candidate with personal contacts, colleagues, community leaders, adversaries and judges with whom the candidate has interacted. Each investigative team includes a non-lawyer, and the Commission itself has designated seats for community members.
The investigative team leader presents the team’s findings to the Commission, which then interviews the candidate directly. The Commission members then vote by secret ballot, applying a set of 10 criteria to assign one of three ratings: “Highly Recommended,” “Recommended” or “Not Recommended.” In order for a candidate to receive a “Highly Recommended” rating, 80% of Commission members present must vote in favor of that rating. Candidates for retention only are eligible for the ratings of “Recommended” or “Not Recommended.” This year, the Commission members spent more than 30 hours conducting interviews, deliberating candidates’ qualifications and issuing recommendations, in addition to the many hours spent as liaisons to investigative teams.
You can view all of the 2023 candidate ratings at ElectQualifiedJudges.com.
