New Mexico Judicial Standards Amendment, Constitutional Amendment 1 (2012)
|Constitutional Amendment 1|
|Constitution:||Article 6, Section 32|
|Referred by:||New Mexico State Legislature|
The measure added two members to the Judicial Standards Commission by changing the New Mexico Constitution to mandate this. The commission investigates allegations against judges, conducts hearings, and also recommends sanctions to the New Mexico Supreme Court.
- See also: 2012 ballot measure election results
The following are official election results:
|New Mexico Constitutional Amendment 1 (2012)|
Results via New Mexico Secretary of State.
Text of measure
The language that voters saw on the ballot read as follows:
|“|| A Joint Resolution Proposing An Amendment To Article 6, Section 32 Of The Constitution Of New Mexico To Provide For Two Additional Members To Sit On The Judicial Standards Commission, A Municipal Judge And A Public Member.
The following are arguments that were made in support of the measure. The information below was obtained from the League of Women Voters of Los Alamos:
- "Municipal judges represent the largest category of judges in the state, and yet there is no dedicated slot for a municipal judge on the commission. Adding a municipal judge to the commission provides equal representation on the oversight body that monitors their job performance."
- "It is unfair for complaints regarding a municipal judge’s job performance to be resolved solely by people who lack the current, firsthand experiences and views of a municipal judge. Thus, adding a municipal judge as a member of the Commission increases fairness."
- "Adding a municipal judge and a citizen member would retain the current balance of power on the Commission. This change would ensure that views of municipal judges would be heard along with those of the other judges, attorneys, and citizen members. This is especially important when a municipal judge is the subject of a complaint alleging.
- Adding two more members to the Commission, for a total of 13, would make its work unnecessarily difficult. It is always challenging to reach consensus when more people are involved in a process. All disciplinary recommendations of the Commission require a majority consensus. It is not in the best interests of the citizenry to slow down the judicial oversight process.
- A Constitutional Amendment is unnecessary because such changes could be accomplished by amending current law through the Legislature instead of permanently changing the Constitution. A bill requiring that a municipal judge be a member of the Commission could be passed by the Legislature.
Path to the ballot
- New Mexico 2012 ballot measures
- 2012 ballot measures
- List of New Mexico ballot measures
- New Mexico Legislature
- List of ballot measures by state
- New Mexico Judicial Standards Commission on Judgepedia
State of New Mexico
Santa Fe (capital)
|State executive officers||
Governor | Lieutenant Governor | Attorney General | Secretary of State | Treasurer | State Auditor | Secretary of Education | Superintendent of Insurance | Secretary of Agriculture | Secretary of Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources | Secretary of Workforce Solutions | Chairman of Public Regulation Commission |
Inspection of Public Records Act | Transparency Checklist | Government corruption | Transparency Legislation | Open Records procedures | Transparency Advocates | Transparency blogs | State budget | Taxpayer-funded lobbying associations |
List of Counties |
List of Cities |
List of Towns |
List of School Districts |