News & Updates

A thirteen-member judicial commission overturned a lower disciplinary panel that issued a cease-and-desist order against a Democratic supreme court candidate and former court of appeals judge, who identified himself as a judge several times in a campaign brochure. According to the commission, the statements were misleading but not false under the state’s code of judicial conduct.

The three justices who are standing for retention in November have raised nearly $1 million for their campaigns. The bulk of these contributions have come from lawyers and law firms. The justices are prohibited from personally soliciting contributions, so they have appointed campaign committees to act in their behalf.

Groups formed to support and oppose the retention of three supreme court justices are expected to run television spots and newspaper ads as the November election nears. “Restore Justice 2012” is targeting the justices for their role in removing a proposed constitutional amendment regarding federal health care from the 2010 ballot.

The Republican candidate for attorney general voiced his support for moving to a federal system of selecting judges. Such a proposal passed a house committee in March and is under consideration in the senate judiciary committee.

Incumbent Justice David Medina was defeated in the July 31 runoff for the Republican spot on the November ballot by challenger John Devine, a former trial court judge who has run for six political offices since 1994. Devine raised ethical concerns about Medina and touted his own anti-abortion activism in his grassroots campaign

Governor Martinez asked the judicial nominating commission to submit more names for a trial court vacancy, after the commission forwarded the name of one of only two applicants. The nominating commission reopened the application period and will submit any additional potential appointees to the governor in late August. If the governor declines to make an appointment, the supreme court will fill the seat.

Three Democratic senators asked Chief Justice Stuart Rabner to investigate allegations that a Republican legislator pressured superior court judges regarding a judicial nomination. According to the senators, the Republican lawmaker told two judges facing re-nomination that the governor would “end their judicial careers” if they did not persuade Democrats to sign off on the governor’s nominee.

Supporters of a ballot measure that would alter the composition of the nominating commission for appellate court vacancies are unhappy with the issue summary prepared by the secretary of state’s office and plan to file a lawsuit. The proposed amendment’s sponsor describes part of the summary as “flat-out untrue” and calls the secretary of state a “dishonest broker of partisan politics.”

Sixteen of the 22 applicants for a supreme court vacancy are women. Indiana is one of three states without a woman on its high court. This will be Governor Daniels’ third appointment to the five-member court.

A state prosecutor announced that no charges would be filed against the three justices standing for retention in November. Governor Scott asked the state law enforcement agency to investigate whether the justices had violated state law in having court employees notarize campaign documents during working hours in order to meet a filing deadline, but according to the prosecutor, this cannot reasonably be described as furthering the justices’ campaigns.

As a result of a split vote on the issue by the supreme court, Justice Michael Gableman will not be required to recuse himself from cases involving a law firm that provided him with free legal representation in an ethics case in 2010.

Two supreme court justices are disputing which of them has seniority and should replace Chief Justice Kitty Kimball when she steps down next year. Justice Bernette Johnson was serving on an intermediate appellate court in 1994 when she was appointed to the supreme court as part of a federal consent decree, and she was elected in 2000.

Governor Christie nominated a sitting superior court judge, and former federal and state prosecutor, to the supreme court. In recent months, two Christie nominees have been rejected by the senate judiciary committee. Christie’s only other supreme court nominee waited one year before being confirmed by the legislature.

Though plaintiff attorneys and their firms typically back Democratic judicial candidates, Republican chief justice candidate Roy Moore has received $55,000 from these groups. The supreme court is composed of nine Republicans, and Moore’s is the only race of five on the ballot where there is a Democratic opponent.

A group known as Defend Justice from Politics formed to support the three justices up for retention in November.

Citing the “Rule of Necessity” and the fact that he did not witness one of the events that gave rise to the case, Justice Patrick Crooks declined to recuse himself from the discipline case involving Justice David Prosser. Prosser and Justice Patience Roggensack have recused themselves, and Prosser requested that his other colleagues do so as well.

The state election commission voted to postpone consideration of whether the “rescue funds” provision of the public financing pilot program for supreme court candidates survived a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a similar provision in Arizona’s program, reasoning that the provision has not yet come into play in this year’s races.

A Democratic Party committee chose a state senator to run against Justice Terrence O’Donnell in November, following the previous candidate’s withdrawal from the race in April due to lack of campaign funds.

The judicial council forwarded to Governor Parnell the names of two potential appointees for the supreme court vacancy created by Justice Morgan Christen’s move to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The governor must appoint one of the two within 45 days. In his 16 judicial appointments to date, the governor has favored individuals who have conservative or traditional Christian backgrounds.

The lone Democrat on the supreme court defended her colleagues against attacks from her Republican challenger. Justice Yvette McGee Brown rejected the claim that the justice legislate from the bench and described herself as proud to serve on the court.