Why do we elect judges? Because it is in the Nevada State Constitution. Every attempt to move to an appointed system has been rejected by the voters. Do you really want commissions behind closed doors picking our judges. They don’t and won’t appoint the best.
Agree that there’s no perfect system but those of us who have practiced in states with appointed judges know that you generally get far superior judges (with the occasional well-connected hack). Or just look at the federal bench here in Nevada. Sure, they have their issues, but for pure legal acumen I’d take any of the non-senior judges over a randomly selected 8th JD judge.
It’s true that the voters are dumb and will never give up their power to elect totally unqualified judges, but that doesn’t mean we can’t advocate for a better system.
Thank you. I find the “well, the appointment system is flawed” argument to be quite irritating. There is no perfect system. The argument is which system sucks less, and I’ve never heard a good argument about why appointed judges with retention elections (like they do in Utah) is WORSE than straight up elected judges like we do here in Nevada.
I am from Utah and sometimes I am baffled by the way we let indefensible institutional inertia just wreak havoc here, whether it be our judiciary or everything about CCSD. Why is Utah able to build and maintain effective and responsive institutions while we are functionally incompetent in Nevada?
The demographics in Utah are wayyyyy different than Nevada in a way that makes administrative agencies seem better and very few people want to move there. (These may sound like judgments but they are also facts)
“…very few people want to move there.” LOL. When was the last time you visited the Wasatch Front, 3:03 PM? 1983? Honest question.
Utah is getting all of the tech and finance industry even though we have more favorable tax policy. Why? Because they have more stable institutions, stronger community and a better educated work force.
Comparing federal court judges to state court judges is no comparison. Federal judges have weeks to months to have their multiple law clerks draft orders and barely any hearings. Whereas state court judges have higher case loads, move their cases faster, hearings set for nearly all motions, etc.
There are advantages to being a federal judge but I have had some state judges render decisions where it’s clear they just have no idea what’s going on. District of Nevada judges make decisions I disagree with all the time but they’re reasonable decisions that are supported by the facts and law.
I have litigated in Nevada for about 20 years and I do not know many of the judicial candidates each year and I am as unqualified as the average citizen on family court judges. A bi/non-partisan appointment committee should select among applicants (hopefully based upon their qualifications) for appointment – and then the voters should be able to kick them out if the judge’s name appears in the news enough for bad rulings (even though many news sources don’t understand what they’re reporting on). Our federal bench is miles ahead of our state court judges. And don’t get me started on judges’ post-election “retire the debt” circuit at the law firms that will be appearing before them. It’s hard enough to vote for county commissioners and city council members, but at least the electorate have a general idea on why they are voting for a particular candidate. I know appointments will be wrong sometimes, but better than just eenie meenie miny moe.
An appointed system only appoints members of pressure groups who lobby and push for their candidates. So a seat becomes a designated spot for that pressure group. Pressure groups know who they are. Worked in an appointed system in another state. It was equally awful. In one instance they retained a judge that was nailed transporting pot from Mexico and shipping it to his home. So pending charges did not tarnish. Non contested retention elections are meaningless.
Government does not have a good history in appointments. Often who do you know is more important that what you know. You only need to look at federal judges at every level, including the SC. Yes, some are very good jurists, but many are not.
“Often who do you know is more important that what you know.”
Counter argument: It’s difficult, if not impossible, to get elected as a district judge in Clark County if you don’t know (and pay) Tom Letizia and/or Dave Thomas (is he still doing it). The Governor shows up on the ballot for my consideration. Powerful, juiced campaign managers do not. I’d rather have the Governor acting as a gate keeper than some unelected political mercenary.
Disagree. I’ve practiced in front of a handful of state boards, and the appointees are usually pretty good. I’d take them over the hacks that manage to win elections.
Guest
Anonymous
February 11, 2026 10:56 am
Yesterday someone mentioned that there are rules which require native PDF filings. I’ve never seen that in the EDCR. Is that a federal court rule?
As much as non-native PDFs piss me off, it seems like kind of a dick move to make an issue of it with the judge.
There are lots of federal courts that require native PDFs. I think some of the fancier state courts might require it too. I’ve seen at least one federal court require PDF/A, which creates its own set of annoying issues.
Poster from yesterday. EDCR and NEFCR are not explicit about it. I was speaking generally about courts that have adopted rules that more clearly state the requirement for attorneys to submit natively generated PDFs of certain papers.
Guest
Anonymous
February 11, 2026 12:09 pm
lol. The “why do we elect judges” article written by someone who ran in two elections and lost both.
If you’re looking for some med mal, I know a guy. Real gentle, makes it look like an accident, if you call him let me know ’cause I get a referral fee.
RE: Admin Order 26-01, if I read this correctly, Judge Wiese is assigning 2,290 probate matters each to Departments 5 and 8, effectively taking all of Sturman’s probate cases and splitting them between Barisich and Peterson. So after all the pre-empts are filed, Barisich is going to end up with about 4500 cases? That’s great for us, but how is that fair to Barisich?
Maynarich links to a story about sunflowers.
I don’t see the problem with that. I’d much rather read about an endangered plant species than an attorney in free-fall
Does he not have any family or support system at all? This just feels like it is heading towards a very bad/tragic ending at this point.
He doesn’t
Great question, why DO we elect judges? Imagine if we appointed the best of the best.
Why do we elect judges? Because it is in the Nevada State Constitution. Every attempt to move to an appointed system has been rejected by the voters. Do you really want commissions behind closed doors picking our judges. They don’t and won’t appoint the best.
There’s downsides to both ways of doing it.
Appointments – run the risk of appointing people who are well-connected, rather than the best qualified.
Elections – run the risk of uninformed electorate voting for people who they like (or who have more billboards), rather than the best qualified.
I think a good system would be appointments to the bench, and elections to retain them.
The Missouri Plan.
Agree that there’s no perfect system but those of us who have practiced in states with appointed judges know that you generally get far superior judges (with the occasional well-connected hack). Or just look at the federal bench here in Nevada. Sure, they have their issues, but for pure legal acumen I’d take any of the non-senior judges over a randomly selected 8th JD judge.
It’s true that the voters are dumb and will never give up their power to elect totally unqualified judges, but that doesn’t mean we can’t advocate for a better system.
Thank you. I find the “well, the appointment system is flawed” argument to be quite irritating. There is no perfect system. The argument is which system sucks less, and I’ve never heard a good argument about why appointed judges with retention elections (like they do in Utah) is WORSE than straight up elected judges like we do here in Nevada.
I am from Utah and sometimes I am baffled by the way we let indefensible institutional inertia just wreak havoc here, whether it be our judiciary or everything about CCSD. Why is Utah able to build and maintain effective and responsive institutions while we are functionally incompetent in Nevada?
Your view of the system is Utah is both biased and not accurate.
Nearly everything in Utah (not just the judiciary) is built and run better than Nevada. No two neighboring states stand in such stark contrast.
The demographics in Utah are wayyyyy different than Nevada in a way that makes administrative agencies seem better and very few people want to move there. (These may sound like judgments but they are also facts)
“…very few people want to move there.” LOL. When was the last time you visited the Wasatch Front, 3:03 PM? 1983? Honest question.
Utah is getting all of the tech and finance industry even though we have more favorable tax policy. Why? Because they have more stable institutions, stronger community and a better educated work force.
Why are all those dogs barking all of a sudden?
@ 3:24 pm shhh we don’t want immigrants to know that there are tasty, tasty dogs in Utah /s
Utah: Net migration was 11,623 in 2023, approximately 26,000 in 2024, and dropped to 19,223 in 2025. They’re growing by a VGK game per year.
3:11 Rarely is there a post that I know exactly what the poster looks like from the post. You defied the odds.
Comparing federal court judges to state court judges is no comparison. Federal judges have weeks to months to have their multiple law clerks draft orders and barely any hearings. Whereas state court judges have higher case loads, move their cases faster, hearings set for nearly all motions, etc.
Re: “Federal judges have weeks to months to…draft orders…”
Rebuttal: Ron Israel.
There are advantages to being a federal judge but I have had some state judges render decisions where it’s clear they just have no idea what’s going on. District of Nevada judges make decisions I disagree with all the time but they’re reasonable decisions that are supported by the facts and law.
I have litigated in Nevada for about 20 years and I do not know many of the judicial candidates each year and I am as unqualified as the average citizen on family court judges. A bi/non-partisan appointment committee should select among applicants (hopefully based upon their qualifications) for appointment – and then the voters should be able to kick them out if the judge’s name appears in the news enough for bad rulings (even though many news sources don’t understand what they’re reporting on). Our federal bench is miles ahead of our state court judges. And don’t get me started on judges’ post-election “retire the debt” circuit at the law firms that will be appearing before them. It’s hard enough to vote for county commissioners and city council members, but at least the electorate have a general idea on why they are voting for a particular candidate. I know appointments will be wrong sometimes, but better than just eenie meenie miny moe.
getting elected because of their names or gender.
An appointed system only appoints members of pressure groups who lobby and push for their candidates. So a seat becomes a designated spot for that pressure group. Pressure groups know who they are. Worked in an appointed system in another state. It was equally awful. In one instance they retained a judge that was nailed transporting pot from Mexico and shipping it to his home. So pending charges did not tarnish. Non contested retention elections are meaningless.
There was a pitch to do just this back in the early 2010s, IIRC. It faced the same political end as all of the other attempts.
Government does not have a good history in appointments. Often who do you know is more important that what you know. You only need to look at federal judges at every level, including the SC. Yes, some are very good jurists, but many are not.
“Often who do you know is more important that what you know.”
Counter argument: It’s difficult, if not impossible, to get elected as a district judge in Clark County if you don’t know (and pay) Tom Letizia and/or Dave Thomas (is he still doing it). The Governor shows up on the ballot for my consideration. Powerful, juiced campaign managers do not. I’d rather have the Governor acting as a gate keeper than some unelected political mercenary.
Dave Thomas is back doing it
The idea that the voters of Clark County are assessing “what you know not who you know” is hilarious.
Disagree. I’ve practiced in front of a handful of state boards, and the appointees are usually pretty good. I’d take them over the hacks that manage to win elections.
Yesterday someone mentioned that there are rules which require native PDF filings. I’ve never seen that in the EDCR. Is that a federal court rule?
As much as non-native PDFs piss me off, it seems like kind of a dick move to make an issue of it with the judge.
There are lots of federal courts that require native PDFs. I think some of the fancier state courts might require it too. I’ve seen at least one federal court require PDF/A, which creates its own set of annoying issues.
Poster from yesterday. EDCR and NEFCR are not explicit about it. I was speaking generally about courts that have adopted rules that more clearly state the requirement for attorneys to submit natively generated PDFs of certain papers.
lol. The “why do we elect judges” article written by someone who ran in two elections and lost both.
Can be sour grapes and also correct.
The “Why do we elected judges article” where did that appear. Please send reference or link.
Looking for a medmal referral.
If you’re looking for some med mal, I know a guy. Real gentle, makes it look like an accident, if you call him let me know ’cause I get a referral fee.
Cut you open. Puts the sponge in. Sews you up.
RE: Admin Order 26-01, if I read this correctly, Judge Wiese is assigning 2,290 probate matters each to Departments 5 and 8, effectively taking all of Sturman’s probate cases and splitting them between Barisich and Peterson. So after all the pre-empts are filed, Barisich is going to end up with about 4500 cases? That’s great for us, but how is that fair to Barisich?
No, the rest go to 29. Sturman had over 10,000 probate cases on top of her civil cases. Now three departments will split probate.
The district judge doesn’t do anything in the vast majority of probate cases. I don’t think there will be many pre-empts.