We have been honored to have the cooperation of those who take on the important tasks of running for office and serving our courts. Because our process depends on the volunteer efforts of dozens of lawyers and several community members, we now interview only candidates in contested races. We hope that all of those candidates will participate in our process. Together we can inform voters about the judicial candidates on the Cuyahoga County ballot, and the importance of voting in judicial elections.
We hold our interviews within weeks after the filing deadlines for the coming elections and at least 2 months before Election Day. We strive to report our ratings back to the candidates as soon as possible. Our goal is to make our ratings public no less than 30 days before each election, so that they are available to candidates, those voting early, and those who will go to the polls on Election Day.
We evaluate each candidate individually, and without regard to the candidate’s political party. The candidates who receive “Good” or “Excellent” ratings are those whom we believe have unquestioned integrity, a strong work ethic, judicial temperament, professional competence and an understanding of the challenges and assets of the community they seek to serve. Every organization considers whether the candidate’s qualifications are a good match for the particular position sought. Click here for a more detailed statement of our criteria.
Each member organization rates a candidate as “Excellent”, “Good”, “Adequate” or “Not Recommended”, unless a candidate fails to appear, to complete or sign the questionnaire, or to sign and return the release permitting us to check his disciplinary record, without a satisfactory excuse. In these circumstances, the heads of the member organizations will give the candidate a “Refused to Participate” rating or, if there is sufficient information to warrant it, a rating of “Not Recommended”. Under the rules of three of our organizations, if two candidates receive the same rating, the organization may then compare them and rate one as “preferred”.
Before our interviews, we ask every candidate to complete and return our candidate questionnaire. Any information that a candidate wishes our members to consider must be submitted with the questionnaire. Materials cannot be distributed at the interviews.
We invite candidates also to submit a photograph and a short biographical statement that will be posted on our website with the candidate ratings. Except for these two items, the information that candidates submit to us and all of our discussions with the candidates and with each other are confidential.
Each member organization is responsible for selecting the members who will participate in the judicial interviews, and for reviewing and approving the rating recommendations that its participating members make. All participants must agree to keep our discussions confidential and not to participate in the campaign of any candidate in a race for which we provide ratings.
We interview candidates one by one. A candidate can expect to speak to 40-60 Judge4Yourself.com participants, with diverse practices and clients. The questions asked are often wide-ranging, and sometimes pointed. We strive to get the information needed to give accurate ratings to the voters. We try to give each candidate the opportunity to respond to concerns about his or her background, experience, conduct or habits that may affect an evaluation.
During each interview day there are plenary discussions among all Judge4Yourself participants. Then, the participants from each member organization meet separately to discuss the candidates and the ratings for each. When each member organization has finalized its ratings according to its own procedures, the ratings are compiled. We then inform each candidate of his or her ratings, and publish all of the ratings.