Political Science

Many reasons have been given for the support of either the common laws or civil laws. Both have strengths and weaknesses. A common law can be described as a law that has been created by judges through court decisions or those of similar tribunals. Common laws are not developed through the action of the executive arm or through legislature. Common laws are based on the argument that it is not fair to treat facts that are similar differently. This would mean that a judge need to follow the same reasoning that has been used in the past to judge a current case (Encyclopedia Britannica). On the other hand, civil law is based on legislation as the main law source, with the court system being inquisitorial, not bound by precedent and also composed of trained officers (judicial)  (Encyclopedia Britannica).
The United States of America in the exception of Louisiana uses common law in its judicial system. Due to the fact that common laws are dynamic, it has been claimed that the judicial system can be politically influenced (Lectric Law Library). The judicial selection of systems of the United States of America is often politicized. In the country, eighty seven percent of the judges (state) must face elections while in thirty nine states some of the judges are elected. This is according to the report given by the National Center for State Courts. Most states support popular election of judges with the claim that this would make the judges accountable to the peoples will. A judge who is viewed as making several unpopular decisions is in a position of being confronted and then sacked from the bench (Liptak). Electing judges usually baffle political scientists in the other parts of the world where judges are never elected but appointed by the judicial service commission or the executive. In the latter case, it is only those with technical skills and experiences would be selected as opposed to using popularity. For example in the United States, the federal judges are appointed by the president and later ratified by the legislature. The act of electing judges has turned the exercise to be more political with competing judges campaigning even by using advertisements. It is not a surprise to get an aspiring judge using a large amount of money in wooing voters.  Many of them are also aligned to major political parties (Liptak).  A survey conducted in Texas showed that many people believed that judicial decisions are to fair extent influenced by the contributions made during the campaigns. Many people agree that politics have reduced the integrity of the rule of the law (Fight the Death Penalty).
To prevent the infiltration of politics into the selection of the of the judges or other staff in the judiciary, there should be a judicial service commission that hands to the executive the names of  candidates that they feel are qualified for this job. The names should be taken to the congress for vetting and then to the executive who would appoint or return them to the legislature if not approved.  If people still feel that they want to have their opinion felt in the judicial appointments, they should be given power to recall unqualified judges through balloting.
Law experts have stated that in most cases, a political question in the United States often turn into a judicial one. This has often brought an exceptional dilemma in the US courts. This is the issue of how a judge can resolve a case that is more political than legal in nature. It may prove hard operating with such a structure of the judiciary as well as the process of decision making that the judge engages in. The problem often begins in the selection method, whereby most of the judges are lawyers who are brought to the bench without much official training. Many of these lawyers are from diverse backgrounds and have different intellectual inclinations as well as political preferences. Since Federal judges are appointed by the president, they in many cases incline to his political party in their rulings and decision making. Scholars have argued that the political preferences of the justices will often dictate the decisions that are made in various cases (Sherry). Research has shown that that judges selected by conservative regimes often vote in a conservative manner with those appointed by liberal authorities choosing to vote in the contrary. Judges are sometimes influenced by the public opinions regarding a certain political theme. If the majority from the state or nation support a certain issue, a judge may be influenced in his or her decisions (Maxwell).
To prevent political influence on the court decisions, the US Federal and State governments may need to move from using common laws to using civil laws. This is because the laws would be created by the legislature or executive arms and the judges would only be needed to interpret and follow them. Common laws have their weaknesses especially when a judge makes a wrong judgment.