The Maverick Who Took on the System
In an era when Michigan’s judicial system is plagued by secrecy, politics, and public distrust, it’s worth revisiting the bold vision of a woman who tried to fix it all more than a decade ago. Former Michigan Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Ann “Betty” Weaver spent her 16 years on the state’s highest bench fighting for transparency, accountability, and integrity, even when it meant going toe-to-toe with her own colleagues.
Weaver, who served from 1995 to 2010 (including a term as Chief Justice), was more than a jurist; she was a whistleblower. She exposed the corrosive political games inside the court, refused to stay silent about backroom deals, and risked professional isolation to speak truth to power. And when the system refused to change, she stepped down and published Judicial Deceit, a bombshell exposé that pulled back the curtain on Michigan’s highest court and laid out a seven-point plan to fix it.
Now, as public confidence in the courts craters and abuses of power multiply across Michigan, Weaver’s roadmap for reform isn’t just relevant; it’s essential.
Who Was Elizabeth Weaver?
Born in 1941 and raised in New Orleans, Weaver earned her law degree at Tulane and relocated to Michigan, where she quickly became a respected voice in the legal community. She was elected probate judge in Leelanau County in 1974, later appointed to the Michigan Court of Appeals, and eventually elected to the Michigan Supreme Court in 1994.
Weaver’s tenure was defined by courage. She repeatedly clashed with other justices over secrecy and partisanship, calling out what she described as “tyranny cloaked in judicial robes.” She spoke out against political manipulation of judicial nominations, dark money campaign spending, and the exclusion of the public from court governance. By 2010, Weaver resigned in protest, not in defeat; determined to keep fighting for reform from the outside.
Her legacy is one of principled defiance and relentless advocacy for a judiciary that serves people over politics.
The Seven-Point Plan: A Blueprint for Reform
Weaver’s plan, published after her retirement, is as visionary today as it was when she wrote it. Each point targets a structural flaw in the Michigan judiciary and each offers a practical solution.
1. End Partisan Judicial Nominations
The Problem: Supreme Court candidates are nominated by political parties, turning judicial races into partisan battles.
The Solution: Require justices to qualify by petition, just like trial and appellate judges, removing party labels and reducing political influence.
2. Enforce a 14-Year Term Limit
The Problem: Long, repeated terms create entrenched power and discourage accountability.
The Solution: Cap Supreme Court service at 14 years to ensure fresh perspectives and limit careerism on the bench.
3. Reform Gubernatorial Appointments
The Problem: Vacancies are filled solely by the governor, concentrating power and enabling political favoritism.
The Solution: Use a bipartisan advisory commission and require Senate confirmation for all appointments.
4. Overhaul Campaign Finance and Transparency
The Problem: Dark money dominates judicial campaigns, and donors often remain anonymous.
The Solution: Mandate real-time disclosure (within 48 hours) of all contributions and ban untraceable donations.
5. Introduce Public Funding for Judicial Campaigns
The Problem: Campaign costs price out qualified candidates who lack wealthy donors.
The Solution: Offer voluntary public financing through a tax check-off system, leveling the playing field.
6. Elect Justices by Geographic Districts
The Problem: Statewide elections overrepresent urban interests and marginalize rural voices.
The Solution: Divide Michigan into seven districts, each electing one justice to ensure geographic diversity and representation.
7. Eliminate Unnecessary Secrecy
The Problem: Too many court decisions, policies, and administrative actions happen behind closed doors.
The Solution: Mandate public disclosure of internal procedures, meetings, budgets, and communications with limited exceptions for sensitive matters.
Weaver’s Seven-Point Plan: Summary and Rationale
Weaver’s Seven-Point Plan (as laid out in Judicial Deceit and in her reform writings) addresses the most glaring pathologies in Michigan’s system: partisan nominations, opaque funding, insular appointment power, geographic inequity, entrenched tenure, and administrative secrecy. Below is a distilled version of the plan with commentary and suggestions for adapting it today.
| Point | Weaver’s Proposal | Rationale & Challenges | How It Could Work Today |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Eliminate party nominations for Supreme Court elections | Instead of party primaries or endorsements, justices would qualify for the ballot via petition, the same as trial and appellate judges. | Parties and partisan labels warp public perception and encourage ideological campaigning over merit. | This could be done by statute (for example, revising election law) and would reduce the incentive to run purely as ideological “brand” judges. It also aligns with a more neutral judiciary ideal. |
| 2. Adopt a 14-year term limit | No Supreme Court justice could serve more than 14 years. | This prevents lifetime entrenchment, refreshes the bench periodically, and limits rent-seeking. | A statute might put this in place, but a constitutional amendment would be more secure. Could be implemented prospectively (i.e., only apply from enactment forward). |
| 3. Reform gubernatorial appointment of vacancies | Use a nonpartisan advisory commission (with both attorney and non-attorney members) to vet candidates, and require Senate confirmation for any appointment. | Currently, governors may appoint replacements with minimal constraints, giving disproportionate influence to whoever holds the governorship. | The state legislature could pass a statute to require commission screening, and a constitutional amendment could enshrine the confirmation requirement. A commission structure would have to be carefully designed (term-limits, balanced membership, transparency). |
| 4. Campaign finance and disclosure reform | Ban contributions from unnamed donors or groups; require any money contributed to a judicial candidate to be disclosed within 48 hours. | “Dark money” and untraceable spending erode public trust and let interests influence judicial outcomes covertly. | Michigan’s campaign finance laws could be amended to impose these disclosure rules for judicial races specifically. Enforcement would require strong penalties and oversight by an independent body. |
| 5. Public funding (via tax check-off) | Establish a voluntary tax check-off fund (like in some gubernatorial or legislative races) to support Supreme Court campaigns. | Public funding helps level the playing field, reduce dependence on wealthy donors, and encourage candidates without deep pockets. | The state could include a line in the tax return form, or dedicate some public revenue to judicial campaign grants. Matching funds or voucher programs could also be explored. |
| 6. Supreme Court based on geographic districts (seven districts) | Divide the state into seven geographic districts, each electing one justice. | Today, Michigan uses a statewide “at-large” approach; this advantage favors more populous or politically dominant regions and reduces local accountability. | A constitutional amendment would likely be required. But the shift would force justices to represent different parts of the state, ensuring rural areas have a voice and reducing domination by metro areas. |
| 7. Eliminate unnecessary secrecy; require transparency | Mandate openness in court administration, commissions, internal procedures, communications, and require justification for any secrecy. | Too much occurs behind closed doors. Decisions about governance, staffing, internal rules, and finances are often opaque. | This could be achieved via statute, court rule reform, or constitutional language. For example, internal memos, administrative budgets, commissioner appointments, meeting minutes, recusals—all should have appropriate public oversight or reporting. |
Weaver acknowledged that four of these proposals could be enacted by legislation and three would require constitutional amendment. The edits needed in Michigan’s governance structure are substantial, but her plan is coherent and holistic rather than piecemeal.
How Michigan Can Use Weaver’s Plan Today
Weaver’s reforms aren’t relics; they’re a roadmap. Here’s how Michigan can start implementing them:
- Pass legislation to end partisan nominations, require real-time donation disclosures, and create an advisory commission for appointments.
- Launch ballot initiatives for constitutional changes, including term limits, district-based elections, and Senate confirmation.
- Build coalitions of lawyers, journalists, nonprofits, and citizens to pressure lawmakers and educate the public.
- Start with transparency reforms, the easiest and most achievable solution by far, to build momentum for bigger structural changes.
Most importantly, Michigan desperately needs a cultural shift. The judiciary is not a playground for political power. It is a public trust. And as Weaver understood, restoring that trust means rewriting the rules entirely.
A Legacy We Ignore at Our Own Peril
Justice Weaver saw the rot in Michigan’s judiciary long before the public did and she gave us a blueprint to fix it. Yet, more than a decade later, too many of her warnings have been ignored. Partisan control still shapes the bench. Money still floods campaigns. And secrecy still shields misconduct from public view.
Weaver’s Seven-Point Plan is not just a reform agenda; it’s a call to arms. If Michigan wants a judiciary that serves justice instead of politics, transparency instead of secrecy, and people instead of power, it’s time to finish what Elizabeth Weaver started.
It’s Not Too Late.
Contact your state lawmakers. Demand legislative hearings on judicial reform. Support ballot initiatives for constitutional changes. And most of all, keep talking about the courts — because the less attention we pay, the more corruption thrives.
Justice Weaver lit the path. Now it’s on us to walk it.
Make a one-time donation
Make a monthly donation
Make a yearly donation
Choose an amount
Or enter a custom amount
Your contribution is appreciated.
Your contribution is appreciated.
Your contribution is appreciated.
DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly