Nearly all state and local judges across the country have to run for election. Federal judges are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Why the difference?

Author Jed Handelsman Shugerman, a professor at Harvard Law School, found the answer in a book he wrote about the history of the judicial selection process in the United States. In the beginning of the republic, most state and local judges were chosen the same way as federal judges.

It didn’t take long for reformers to recognize that process brought too much nastiness and politics into the process. State judges became beholden to the political machines that owned the statehouse.

By the 19th century, states had thrown out judicial appointment and turned to the ballot box.

In Michigan, we even vote for state Supreme Court justices while usually only vaguely aware who they are. We call them nonpartisan even though we know they are selected by the political parties.

Shugerman says the most successful selection process currently in use is a hybrid system. The governor’s office selects the judge. When the judge’s term ends, though, he must stand for election. Think of it as checks and balances.

The hybrid system might be the way to go in making up the judiciary.