The Brennan Center, long a proponent of campaign finance regulations, now wants to get rid of judicial elections

If there was ever a doubt that the Brennan Center was anti-democratic, I hope that notion is now put aside:

Caperton v. Massey, the Supremes set out a new standard requiring judges to recuse themselves if there is a "probability of bias" in a case. That was a marked departure from historical standards, which required a judge to step off primarily when he had a direct financial interest. . . .

This mayhem is the strategy of the George Soros-funded Brennan Center and Justice at Stake that see draconian recusal standards as a way to stigmatize judicial elections. By impugning a judge's ability to rule impartially by attacking his campaign statements, these groups hope more states will choose their judges through "merit selection"—a process that gives disproportionate influence to lawyers and tilts state courts to the left. They've scheduled an event in Michigan in February to push the state to consider an end to judicial elections. . . .