Obviously, only the federal government through the US Constitution and the remaining 11 states set up a more or less insulated judiciary as the 3rd branch of federal or state government. The states aren't compelled to follow suit; "states rights" and all that.
It does seem not such a good system IMO for the populace in states to vote "approval" of justices ruling based on law. Same for the referendum system which can set up discriminatory laws in some states (like California's Prop
, only to later be struck down by state or federal judges as unconstitutional based narrowly on the state constitution or more broadly to affect the country if found to violate the federal constitution's protections)
The effort in Iowa is ludicrous and evil -- consider this was ONE decision among how many others these judges made that hadn't ruffled feathers and fed the hordes to have revenge.
I agree -- appointees are a better way, and maybe also term limits of sufficient length to not have "lifelong" appointments just in case....