Lengthy ballots, quiet campaigns: How can Harris County voters choose when electing judges?
This November, there are 29 contested judicial races in Harris County, each with candidates vying to spend the next four or six years ruling on everything from speeding ticket fines to landlord-tenant disputes to lawsuits and criminal cases, probate cases involving guardianships or contested wills.
With that many contests, on top of other, non-judicial matchups at the local, state and national level, it can be difficult to get informed on each race before heading to the polls.
Moreover, judicial hopefuls typically do not campaign in the same way as candidates for other elected offices. Part of that restraint is born out of concern about weighing in on subjects that could end up in their courts, leaving candidates open to accusations of bias.
Generally speaking, the furthest most judicial candidates are willing to go is promising to treat all sides fairly in their courts and to make rulings based on the law.
That leaves many voters with little more to consider than party affiliation and name recognition.
In an attempt to help voters figure out how to choose which candidates to support, the Houston Landing went to the experts, asking three local lawyers how they decide who to cast their ballots for in local judicial races.
How do lawyers choose?For David Harrell, president of the Houston Bar Association, working in front of judicial candidates provides him the ability to vote based on his personal experiences when heading to the polls.
"I'm in a position to know based upon how these judges perform, or how I think they'll perform if they're not an incumbent judge, and I have an opportunity to make a choice," Harrell said.
Sylvia Escobedo has been practicing criminal law for 29 years. A member of the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association board of directors, Escobedo also uses her firsthand experience in the criminal courthouse to guide her decision-making when it comes to candidates for the criminal bench.
"I know what it's like when I go into one court versus another," Escobedo said. "And, so for me, I have firsthand personal experience and information, so I know how to vote in the criminal courthouse."
Escobedo's judicial expertise begins and ends with criminal judges, however. So, when she needs to research candidates for civil, family, probate and appellate benches, Escobedo turns to trusted colleagues with other courtroom experience.
"They're the ones in those buildings in front of those judges time and time again," she said. "So, they can give me the information I don't have firsthand knowledge of."
Tom Phillips, former Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court, also recommends turning to trusted sources.
"If you know lawyers who actually are in the courts, you know, the word of someone you trust is worth 20 words from a stranger," Phillips said.
Those without a personal network of trusted lawyers are not out of luck, however.
During odd-numbered years, the Houston Bar Association conducts a judicial evaluation poll , asking members to rate sitting judges across a number of categories, including knowledge of the law, impartiality, how they treat attorneys and witnesses in their courtrooms, and the efficiency with which they schedule hearings and trials.
The HBA also conducts an election survey during even-numbered years called the judicial preference poll , asking members to choose between the judicial candidates on the November ballot.
Results of the 2024 judicial preference poll were published on the HBA website on Oct. 14.
Harrell also recommended voters look to media outlets' candidate endorsements or election guides created by nonprofits like the League of Women Voters of Houston as other helpful resources.
You can find the Houston Landing's voter guide here .
Other opportunities include candidate forums in which judicial hopefuls are given a chance to meet voters and state their cases for why they should be elected.
Finally, there are the candidates' campaign websites. Many, though not all, include brief biographies, including their education, years of legal and courtroom experience and judicial philosophies. They also usually list endorsements and issues they say are at stake in the election.
Bonus question: Is direct election the best way to select judges?With so many judicial candidates on the ballot each election, Phillips said it can be nearly impossible to become fully informed on each race.
That's why Phillips favors changing the way Texas judges get elected, saying moving toward an appointment-and-retention model could be successful.
Known as the Missouri model, an appointment-and-retention system calls for a small committee of legal experts to nominate candidates to fill judicial vacancies, with the governor having final say over appointments.
Every few years, voters would be able to cast a retention vote, keeping judges on the bench whom they believe are doing a good job, and ousting those who are not.
Whenever a judge is voted out of office, the cycle would begin again with the nominating committee.
Both Harrell and Escobedo, however, said they have reservations about an appointment-and-retention system.
They worry judicial appointments could become too partisan, with Escobedo saying the best judicial reform option would be to remove partisanship from judicial elections.
That way, she said, voters would be more inclined to vote based on a candidate's merits rather than their party affiliation.
"Just because you're a Democrat, or just because you're Republican," she said, "does not make you qualified to be a judge on any bench."
