News & Updates

Three supreme court justices are up for reelection in 2012, but all three are running unopposed and will retain their seats.

Republicans legislators have introduced several bills this session aimed at the courts, including changing the way judges are disciplined and amending the constitution to address how judges are selected. A proposal that would have stripped the courts of judicial review over state laws was withdrawn by its sponsor after it met with heavy criticism from both parties.

After ten years of leading the court, Chief Justice Christine Durham is stepping down from that position but remaining on the court. Members of the court unanimously selected Justice Matthew B. Durant to serve as chief justice as of April 1.

Governor Malloy promised to look for diversity of thought, experience, and gender in making judicial appointments in 2012, a year in which he is expected to fill more than two dozen judgeships. Three of Malloy’s four judicial appointees during 2011 were racial minorities.

Calls mounted for supreme court justice Joan Orie Melvin to step down from the court or take a temporary leave of absence as a grand jury investigates charges that she violated state election laws in her past judicial campaigns.

Dissatisfaction with the redistricting maps drawn by a panel of appellate judges has led to renewed calls by some legislators for changes in how appellate judges are selected. Proposals include adding more citizen members to the judicial nominating commission, which is said to be dominated by trial attorneys, and prohibiting judges from serving on the commission.

Two candidates have filed to run for the supreme court seat being vacated by Justice Tom Chambers, who announced his intention to retire at the end of the year. Former justice Richard Sanders, who lost a bid for reelection in 2010, is considering running as well.

A Democratic legislator circulated a resolution calling for the removal of supreme court justice Michael Gableman, for presiding over cases involving a law firm that provided him with free legal services. The constitution allows the legislature to remove judges by a two-thirds vote—a process known as a bill of address.

A house subcommittee approved a bill that would allow the governor to replace the five members of the judicial nominating commission who are appointed by the governor without bar association input. (Currently, commission members serve four-year terms and may only be removed for cause.)

A circuit court judge announced her intention to challenge a court of appeals judge in the Republican primary for the open supreme court seat created by Justice Tom Woodall’s retirement. In announcing her candidacy, she pledged not to accept contributions from political action committees.

The supreme court amended the code of judicial conduct to bar elected judges from hearing cases when a litigant, lawyer, or law firm involved in the case “has made contributions or given such support to the judge’s campaign that the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

Governor Perdue appointed eighteen members—both lawyers and non-lawyers—to the judicial nominating commission she created by executive order in April 2011. The commission will screen and recommend candidates for interim vacancies on the state’s appellate courts and major trial court.

The state bar association released attorney evaluations for trial judges up for reelection in 2012. It marks the first time since 1980 that judges statewide have been evaluated. The bar, which undertook the project to provide voters with more information about judicial candidates, plans to conduct a companion evaluation of judicial challengers.

The Las Vegas Review-Journal released its annual report on attorney ratings of supreme court justices and trial judges in Clark County. Reelection support for individual supreme court justices ranged from 56% to 83%.

In upholding the state’s ban on direct corporate contributions to political candidates and parties, the supreme court noted that judicial elections are particularly vulnerable to anonymous spending by large corporations.

In 2011, fourteen bills were introduced in seven states to remove judges from office. All but two of the impeachment efforts were motivated by disagreement with judicial decisions.

Only one Democrat is vying for a seat on the state’s appellate courts in 2012. The state’s Democratic Party chairman attributed this to the high cost and contentiousness of judicial elections in Alabama. Three Republican incumbents on the supreme court will be reelected without opposition.

Supreme court justice Joan Orie Melvin was named as a target of a grand jury investigation into potential improper use of judicial and legislative staff for her election campaigns.

In discussing his plan to challenge a supreme court-ordered formula for state education funding, Governor Christie pledged to nominate two new supreme court justices this spring who would not “grossly” overstep their powers. The court ruled in May 2011 that Christie’s cuts to education funding were unconstitutional.

Two Democratic legislators sponsored a bill to establish public financing for supreme court elections.