JEC Evaluation Procedures
JEC Evaluation Procedures Each appellate judicial candidate requesting an evaluation by the PBA JEC is eligible to receive a rating of “Highly Recommended,” “Recommended” or “Not Recommended.
The PBA JEC bases its ratings for each candidate on a two-part evaluation process. Each candidate completes a Commission questionnaire. Investigative panels conduct the first phase of the process, which includes personal interviews with the candidates and with individuals who have had professional or personal dealings with them. Upon completion of the investigative process, the panels submit confidential reports to the Commission.
Upon receipt and review of the investigative panel’s report, the Commission conducts the second phase of the evaluation process. The Commission interviews each candidate in Harrisburg, discusses his or her qualifications and reaches consensus on each candidate’s rating. Ratings are made public via news releases and the PBA website.
Definitions of the ratings are:
Highly Recommended: The candidate possesses the highest combination of legal ability, experience, integrity and temperament, and would be capable of outstanding performance as a judge or justice of the court for which he/she is a candidate.
Recommended: Based on legal ability, experience, integrity and temperament, the candidate would be able to perform satisfactorily as a judge or justice of the court for which he/she is a candidate.
Not Recommended: Based on legal ability, experience, integrity or temperament, or any combination thereof, at the present time, the candidate is inadequate to perform satisfactorily as a judge or justice of the court for which he/she is a candidate. A candidate for appellate judicial office in Pennsylvania who refuses to participate in the Commission’s evaluation process shall receive a rating of “Not Recommended for Failure to Participate in the Evaluation Process.”