John Jay Hooker

The state’s Special Supreme Court may eventually get around to hearing a case challenging the state’s method of selecting judges. But the panel itself has to get sorted out first.

{ 2 comments }

Op-ed from John Jay Hooker, Advocate for Election & Campaign Finance Reform; September 14, 2012:  Supreme Court Judges, the Big Lie, and the Cover-up In 1973 in the case of Higgins v. (Governor) Dunn, the Supreme Court of Tennessee unlawfully held that the Retention Election statute is constitutional. The constitutionality of the Act was not […]

{ 0 comments }

Gov. Bill Haslam says he will appoint three new judges to a five-member panel formed to hear a case challenging the constitutionality of Tennessee’s method of selecting judges. Three original appointees stepped down over a possible conflict of interest.

{ 1 comment }

More than half the members of Gov. Bill Haslam’s hand-picked special Supreme Court have recused themselves from hearing a case to determine the constitutionality of how Tennessee selects appellate and high-court judges. Special Supreme Court Judges William Muecke Barker, George H. Brown and Robert L. Echols announced Friday they had disqualified themselves from the case […]

{ 5 comments }

Two members of a state panel considering whether Tennessee’s appointment system for selecting judges is constitutional also lead a group that lobbies on the issue. George H. Brown and William M. Barker are board members of Tennesseans for Fair and Impartial Courts, which supports the current system and opposes selection at the ballot box.

{ 6 comments }

Courting Conflicts

by Editorial Staff on August 2, 2012

The governor has chosen the members of a special court to determine a lawsuit in which he himself is named as a defendant. The case on appeal is John Jay Hooker’s challenge to the “Tennessee Plan” for selecting judges.

{ 5 comments }

Beavers, R-Mt. Juliet, wants to revamp the body that hears ethics complaints against judges. She presided over a committee meeting this week examining the Court’s transparency and rules governing judicial conflicts of interest.

{ 5 comments }