Judges from throughout Washington donned black robes and filed into a courtroom Friday at Gonzaga University’s law school. The judges joined dozens of others to honor the memory of two respected judges who served on the Washington Court of Appeals. Both judges – Ben McInturff and George Shields – died last year.

Both jurists were well-known for the reverence and respect they showed for the legal profession.

The day before the memorial service, some breaking news demonstrated how difficult it has become to keep that respect alive. Idaho Supreme Court Justice Linda Copple Trout announced that she will retire Aug. 31. She’s the only woman on Idaho’s top court. She’s leaving rather than face another nasty election campaign.

“That certainly was a factor in my decision,” she said. “I think it tarnishes the judiciary.”

Idaho’s judicial elections weren’t the only ones with some tarnish. Record amounts of money flooded into last year’s Washington state Supreme Court races. Third-party special-interest groups spent nearly $2.7 million, more than in any other state, according to the Justice at Stake Campaign, a national nonpartisan group.

The campaigns got uncharacteristically personal. For instance, a radio ad attacked incumbent Chief Justice Gerry Alexander (who eventually won) by highlighting his age – 70 – in negative language. The ad said, in part: “You’re tired, you get sloppy, you make mistakes.”

Some in legal circles are worried that this dirty campaigning trend will dissuade the best lawyers from running in judicial races. Some favor taking the decision out of the hands of voters. A committee of legal-savvy lawyers and citizens would pick our judges. Or the process would be simplified if citizens could vote yes or no to retain current judges.

Still others wish that judicial conduct restrictions, which limit how candidates can talk about the issues, were even stricter.

But in a democracy, the default position should always remain with the voters, and judicial candidates should be encouraged to debate the issues rather than hide behind their conduct canons. Voters will have to work harder in judicial races, but with the help of the media, they can follow the money trail that follows the candidates. Voters can decide whether a judge is too beholden to an outside group to manifest fairness.

Lawyers and judges running for office can also renounce personal-attack campaigns done on their behalf. Saying to the third-party groups “Your support is not welcome here” might put a chilling effect on the practice.

It would also send a message to voters that the business of electing judges deserves at least a portion of the dignity that the best judges carry with them to the bench. It’s a legacy that can last, as it has for McInturff and Shields.