Judicial Selection in the States: 2009 Trends and Initiatives

State Issue Forum Proposal Current Practice Status Information IL Public funding of State Assembly  IL H.B. 7: Creates a Public  Judicial public financing  IL H.B. 7:  IL H.B. 7 (See judicial elections; Financing of Judicial Elections Task passed the Illinois Senate 10/21/2009 Total Amendment 2) disclosure of Force to assess the need for in each of the last three veto stands, no campaign developing a system of public legislative sessions, but positive action contributions financing for judicial elections has never been called for taken; a vote in the House 8/28/2009  In 2004, groups spent a Governor vetoed combined $9.3 million in bill; 5th Judicial District in 6/30/2009 Sent to most expensive statewide Governor for Supreme Court election signature in national history (5/31/2009 Passed both houses) Judicial Selection in the States: 2009 Trends and Initiatives

State Issue Forum Proposal Current Practice Status Information MN Judicial selection State Senate  S.F. 70, H.F. 224: Propose an  State holds non-  MN S.F. 70:  MN S.F. 70 amendment to the state constitution partisan elections for 5/18/2009 Regular  MN H.F. 224 requiring that judges initially Supreme Court, session ends appointed by the Governor stand for intermediary appeals without bill’s a retention election at the next courts, and trial courts passage; all bills regularly scheduled general election carry over to 2010 held more than three years after session; initial appointment 3/19/2009 Referred to Senate Committee on Rules and Administration  MN H.F. 224: 5/18/2009 Regular session ends without bill’s passage; all bills carry over to 2010 session; 1/22/2009 Referred to State and Local Government Operations Reform, Technology and Elections Judicial Selection in the States: 2009 Trends and Initiatives

State Issue Forum Proposal Current Practice Status Information MO Judicial selection Petition submitted  Petition calls for replacing current  Under Missouri  7/28/2009 Better  News Tribune to the Secretary of system for selecting judges Plan, nominating Courts for (7/28/2009) State’s Office by (Missouri Plan) with a system in commissions nominate Missouri  Kansas City Star Better Courts for which the governor appoints judges judges for governor’s withdraws petition (7/13/2009) Missouri to the Supreme Court, appellate eventual appointment; for technical courts, and some circuit courts; judges stand for retention reasons; plans to these judges would, in turn, be election after one year of resubmit subject to Senate confirmation service on the bench MO Judicial selection Second petition  Petition to put initiative on ballot in  Under Missouri  10/7/2009 Group  St. Louis Post- submitted by Show November 2010 that would allow Plan, nominating announces shift in Dispatch Me Better Courts for vote on whether there should be commissions nominate strategy, move (10/7/2009) (ostensibly same direct election of judges judges for governor’s toward calling for organization, or eventual appointment; direct election of affiliate of Better judges stand for retention judges Courts for election after one year of Missouri; both led service on the bench by James Harris) NV Judicial selection State Senate  SJR 2: Creates merit selection  State holds  SJR 2:  SJR2 (as enrolled) system for Supreme Court justices nonpartisan elections for 5/20/2009  Bill history and district court judges; requires Supreme Court and trial Assembly approves  Las Vegas Review- retention elections for sitting judges courts bill; bill to be put Journal (5/20/2009) on ballot in November 2010 NC Judicial selection State Assembly  H.B. 414: Creates merit selection  State holds  H.B. 414:  H.B. 414 for judicial vacancies on state partisan elections for 8/11/2009 Regular Supreme Court and courts of Supreme Court and session ends appeals intermediary appeals without bill’s courts, and nonpartisan passage; all bills election for trial court carry over to 2010 judges session 3/5/2009 Referred to House Committee on Rules Judicial Selection in the States: 2009 Trends and Initiatives

State Issue Forum Proposal Current Practice Status Information PA Judicial selection State Senate  S.B. 860: Creates, by means of  State holds  S.B. 860:  S.B. 860 constitutional amendment, merit partisan elections for 5/11/2009 selection system for appellate courts intermediate appellate Referred to Senate in the state; provides for Appellate courts Judiciary Nomination Commission as well as Committee for retention elections PA Judicial selection State Senate  S.B. 861: Creates 14 member  State holds  S.B. 861:  S.B. 861 Appellate Court Nominating partisan elections for 5/11/2009 Commission; specifies composition intermediate appellate Referred to Senate of commission courts Judiciary Committee TN Judicial selection State Legislature  S.B. 1573 (H.B. 1448): Creates new  Through June 30:  S.B. 1573:  H.B. 1448/S.B. judicial nominating commission Judicial nominating 6/25/2009 signed 1553 (effective July 1, 2009) and takes commission consists of into law by  Related Press: away the mandated appointments 17 members: 8 appointed governor, Chattanooga Times from the state bar association and by speaker of senate, 2 effective 7/1/2009 Free Press other various attorney groups across drawn from a list  Applications for (7/8/2009) the state that had been integral to the submitted by Tennessee new 17-member previous nomination system. trial lawyers association, judicial 3 from a list submitted nominating by Tennessee association commission of criminal defenders, 1 accepted through non-lawyer, and 1 lawyer 7/31/2009 not nominated by a group. Judicial Selection in the States: 2009 Trends and Initiatives

State Issue Forum Proposal Current Practice Status Information WV Judicial selection State Assembly  H.B. 3309: Creates a system for  State currently lacks  H.B. 3309:  H.B. 3309 public funding of election public financing for 5/31/2009 Session (introduced version) campaigns for candidates for the judicial elections; H.B. ended without West Virginia Supreme Court of 3309 would add entirely bill’s passage; all Appeals; candidates would have to new provisions to state bills carry over to abide by both restrictions on election code 2010 session campaign contributions from private sources and limits on campaign spending WV Judicial selection State Senate  S.B. 311: Creates a system for  State currently lacks  S.B. 311:  S.B. 311 (with public funding of election public financing for 5/31/2009 Session committee campaigns for candidates for the judicial elections ended without substitute) West Virginia Supreme Court of bill’s passage; all  Related Press: The Appeals; similar to H.B. 3309 in bills carry over to State Journal that it would force candidates to 2010 session (4/2/2009); Legal abide by restrictions on campaign News Online contributions from private sources (3/9/2009) and limits on campaign spending Judicial Selection in the States: 2009 Trends and Initiatives

State Issue Forum Proposal Current Practice Status Information WI Public funding of State legislature  A.B. 65: Creates public funding for  A.B. 65:  A.B. 63 judicial elections; judicial elections  Limits can be imposed 11/5/2009 Bill  A.B. 65 disclosure of  A.B. 63: Increases disclosure on candidate spending or passes legislature,  S.B. 221 campaign requirements for individuals or campaign funds only if goes to governor  Related Press: contributions organizations engaged in candidates accepts to sign bill into Milwaukee Journal electioneering communications government funded law Sentinel within 2 months of an election grants (See Wisconsin 10/21/2009 (11/5/2009);  S.B. 221: Modifies certain public Election Campaign Referred to Joint Wisconsin Lawyer finance and disclosure requirements; Fund) Committee on (4/2009) expands definition of political  Current Wisconsin law Finance; communication in context of does not explicitly 6/16/2009 judicial elections characterize Executive action communication as taken; 5/27/2009 political if it mentions Public hearing any candidate by name held within 60 days of  A.B. 63: election 6/16/2009 Executive action taken; 5/27/2009 Public hearing held  S.B. 221: 7/2/2009 Fiscal estimate received; 5/26/2009 Sent to Senate Judiciary Committee