Arizona Public Judicial Review Amendment, Proposition 109 (1992)

From Ballotpedia
Revision as of 14:41, 16 May 2013 by PhilH (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Voting on
State Judiciary
State judiciary.jpg
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Arizona Constitution
Flag of Arizona.png
Preamble
Articles
1234566.178910111213141516171819202122252627282930

The Arizona Public Judicial Review Amendment, also known as Proposition 109 and House Concurrent Resolution 2009, was a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment on the statewide ballot in Arizona, which was approved in the statewide election on November 3, 1992.

  • This proposed amendment to Article VI allows increased public participation in the judicial selection process in Maricopa and Pima Counties.[1]

Election results

Arizona Proposition 109 (1992)
ResultVotesPercentage
Approveda Yes 738,655 57.88%
No537,47542.12%

Official results via: State of Arizona Official Canvass

Text of measure

The text of the ballot read:

OFFICIAL TITLE

House concurrent resolution 2009
A concurrent resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Arizona; amending Article VI, Sections 12, 28, 30, 35, 36, 37, 38 and 40, Constitution of Arizona; amending Article VI, Constitution of Arizona, by adding new Sections 41 and 42; relating to the Judicial Department.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE

Amending the Arizona Constitution to change the method of appointing Superior Court judges in counties with populations of at least 250,000 and all appellate judges; change the appointment and composition of the commissions on court appointments; provide for increased public participation; require consideration of population diversity; require a judicial evaluation system.[1][2]

Constitutional changes

The full changes to the Constitution of Arizona can be found in the State of Arizona 1992 Ballot Propositions guide.

Support

Those in support of the amendment include:[1]

  • State Bar of Arizona

Arguments in favor of the amendment include:[1]

  • Allowing the people to be more involved in the judicial system will garner more respect for the law and the administration of justice.
  • The justice system will be more accountable to the people if this proposition passes.
  • The proposition will require a public performance evaluation process for all justices and judges seeking to be retained in office.

Opposition

Arguments in opposition of the amendment include:[1]

  • The merit system has produced high quality judges in the superior court and appellate courts.
  • The proposition will give people with little law training more authority over the judicial appointment process.
  • The state and county bar associations conduct thorough evaluations of judges and justices.

See also

BP-Initials-UPDATED.png
Suggest a link

External links

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 State of Arizona 1992 Ballot Proposition voting guide
  2. Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributed to the original source.