Nevada Judicial Appointment Amendment (2010)

From Ballotpedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Nevada Constitution
Image:Book128.png
Articles
Preliminary Action • Ordinance • Preamble • 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 • 9 • 10 • 11 • 12 • 13 • 14 • 15 • 16 • 17 • XVIII • 19 • Election Ordinance

Contents

The Nevada Judicial Appointment Amendment will be on the November 2010 ballot in Nevada. The proposed legislatively-referred constitutional amendment calls for the creation of a selection panel that would recommend candidates to the governor for appointment. After the judges' first term, voters will decide whether to allow the appointed judges to retain their positions. They would have to garner approximately 55% of the vote to stay in office.[1][2]

Background

The constitutional amendment developed after Judge Elizabeth Halverson was permanently removed from the bench in 2008. She was suspended in 2007. The Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline found her guilty of sleeping during hearings, making improper contact with jurors, mistreating her staff, improperly hiring two bodyguards and making improper and misleading statements to the press.[3]

Support

Amendment supporters argue that the appointment process would result in more qualified judges and remove the influence of campaign money. Retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor sent Nevada officials a letter in support of the proposal. She wrote, “Citizens can be confident that appointed judges are insulated from special interests who would seek to buy justice through campaign donations.”

Opposition

Opponents, on the other hand, said that the amendment removes voting rights and places the decision only in the hands of a few - the selection panel.[1] “I’m against anything that alters the voters’ rights to pick judges. Judges should be held as accountable as any other public official,” said Republican political consultant Sig Rogich. The Nevada Eagle Forum also opposes the change.[4]

Polls

See also: Polls, 2010 ballot measures
  • On April 5-7, 2010 Mason-Dixon Polling & Research conducted a poll, on behalf of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, which found that 28% of polled registered voters were in favor of the proposed amendment, while 59% were opposed and 13% were undecided. A grand total of 625 registered voters were polled. The margin of error was +/- 4%.[5]
  • On July 12-14, 2010 Mason-Dixon Polling & Research conducted a poll, on behalf of the Las Vegas Review-Journal and KLAS-TV, Channel 8. The poll found that 27% of voters were in favor of the proposed measure, while 54% were opposed and 19% were undecided. A total of 625 voters were polled. According to reports, the margin of error was +/- 5%.[6][7]
Date of Poll Pollster In favor Opposed Undecided Number polled
April 5-7, 2010 Mason-Dixon Polling & Research 28% 59% 13% 625
July 12-14, 2010 Mason-Dixon Polling & Research 27% 54% 19% 625

Path to the ballot

See also: Nevada legislatively-referred constitutional amendments

A majority vote was required in two successive sessions of the Nevada State Legislature.

See also

 		Suggest a link

Articles

External links

Additional reading

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Las Vegas Sun,"Lawmakers pave way for vote on appointing judges," June 6, 2009
  2. ↑ Associated Press,"State panel sends four measures to November ballot," May 9, 2010
  3. ↑ Las Vegas Sun,"Judge Elizabeth Halverson permanently removed from bench," November 17, 2008
  4. ↑ Las Vegas Sun,"Proposal to appoint judges seen as hot issue," July 7, 2009
  5. ↑ Las Vegas Review-Journal,"Poll: Many oppose plan to allow appointment of judges," April 12, 2010
  6. ↑ Las Vegas Review-Journal,"JULY 2010 POLLS," retrieved July 19, 2010
  7. ↑ Las Vegas Review-Journal,"SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 2: Voters want final word on judges," July 19, 2010
v • d • e
2010 ballot measures
I&R States
Non I&R States
Political topics
Other
Retrieved from "http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Nevada_Judicial_Appointment_Amendment_(2010)"
Personal tools