News & Updates

Two of the three supreme court justices up for reelection face challengers in the Republican primary. One justice’s opponent is running to “expose the corrosive influence of big business on the court,” while the other justice’s opponents “want to restore integrity to the court.” The third justice up for reelection faces a Democratic challenger in the general election.

A New York Times commentary discussed the reforms recommended by the Michigan Judicial Selection Task Force, which included better disclosure requirements, open primaries, and campaign oversight committees. The piece closed by calling for replacing judicial elections with gubernatorial appointments based on merit and lamented that not all task force members supported such a reform.

A grand jury charged Justice Joan Orie Melvin with four felonies and five misdemeanors related to her use of state staffers in her 2003 and 2009 judicial campaigns. Justice Melvin issued a statement announcing that she would voluntarily step aside from the court but was not resigning. The supreme court later suspended her from all judicial and administrative duties.

By a unanimous vote, the judicial nominating commission selected Justice Brent Dickson to serve as chief justice of the supreme court. Dickson had the support of his fellow justices and Governor Daniel.

In November, voters will decide whether to make changes to the composition of the appellate judicial commission, which screens and nominates potential appointees for the supreme court and court of appeals.

In the May 8 Democratic primary, an incumbent justice and a county attorney won the nomination. According to campaign finance reports filed at the end of April, the winning candidates were also the biggest spenders. The two Democratic candidates will face two Republican candidates, one of whom opted for public financing, in November.

The same group that led the effort to unseat three justices in the 2010 retention elections announced that it will challenge the sole justice on the ballot this November, Justice David Wiggins, because of his participation in the 2009 unanimous decision that overturned the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.

Governor Lynch nominated Concord attorney Jim Bassett to fill a vacancy on the supreme court. His nomination must be confirmed by the executive council following a public hearing. Some legislators expressed concern that Bassett lacks judicial experience, but opposition may also stem from the governor’s lame-duck status.

Today, Senators Mark Udall and Michael Bennet announced the formation of a bipartisan, 11-member advisory committee that will implement an open process to recommend highly qualified applicants to fill a vacancy on the U.S. District Court in Colorado. Rebecca Love Kourlis, Executive Director of IAALS, is a co-chair of the committee.

Confirmation of judicial nominees has been a contentious issue this year, and on May 7, 2012, lawyers, legal experts, and advocacy groups met with the White House to discuss judicial vacancies and the confirmation process. 

The Obama administration’s efforts to diversify the federal judiciary continue. Nancy Torresen, the first female judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, was formally sworn into office on May 3, 2012.

The senate approved a bill that would alter the process for nominating appellate judges. The judge member of the appellate judicial commission would be replaced by a gubernatorial appointee.

As of mid-April, the three supreme court justices standing for retention in November had each raised between $156,000 and $160,000 for their retention effort, most of which came from lawyers and law firms. Committees handle the justices’ campaign finances, as the code of judicial conduct bars them from personally soliciting contributions.

In the context of retention opposition campaigns against three supreme court justices, the Florida Bar, the American Bar Association, and the League of Women Voters of Florida launched a “The Vote’s in Your Court” public education campaign.

An effort to impose seven-year term limits on judges failed to pass the house and is dead for this legislative session. New Hampshire is one of three states where judges serve for life, or to a mandatory retirement age of 70.

Of the races on the ballot in the May Democratic primary elections, the two supreme court races are the most expensive so far, with the six candidates having spent $1.4 million.

The governor asked a judicial nominating commission to submit the name of more than one candidate for a district court judgeship for which only four attorneys applied. All four applicants—two Republicans and two Democrats—are also running for the seat in November. The commission responded by soliciting additional applicants but did not promise to nominate more candidates.

Despite an earlier agreement to move forward with Senate confirmation of judicial nominees, Senator Al Franken and others report that the process remains acrimonious. Nearly one in 10 seats on the federal bench are currently empty.

A judicial selection task force made seven recommendations and offered draft legislation to improve the process for selecting supreme court justices. Recommendations including nominating candidates in open primaries rather than through party conventions, full disclosure of campaign spending, and the use of a vacancy nominating commission to fill judicial vacancies between elections.

The senate approved a proposed constitutional amendment that would allow the governor to appoint appellate judges with legislative confirmation. The proposal would give the general assembly sixty days to act on a nomination or it would automatically be confirmed. The house later approved the same measure. If approved by a two-thirds vote of the general assembly in 2013, the proposal will go before the voters in 2014.