Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Arizona Judicial Nominating Commissions
| Judicial nominating commissions |
|---|
 |
| Individual nominating committees |
| Select a committee in the dropdown below and click "Submit" to view information about that committee. |
| Methods of judicial selection |
| Partisan elections |
| Nonpartisan elections |
| Michigan method |
| Retention elections |
| Assisted appointment |
| Bar-controlled commission |
| Governor-controlled commission |
| Hybrid commission |
| Legislative elections |
| Gubernatorial appointment |
The Arizona Judicial Nominating Commissions, taken together, are the agencies in Arizona charged with recommending candidates for appointment to the Arizona Supreme Court, appellate courts, and superior courts in Coconino, Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal counties.
The five commissions are:[1]
- The Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments - Supreme and appellate courts
- The Coconino County Commission on Trial Court Appointments - Coconino County superior court
- The Maricopa County Commission on Trial Court Appointments - Maricopa County superior court
- The Pima County Commission on Trial Court Appointments - Pima County superior court
- The Pinal County Commission on Trial Court Appointments - Pinal County superior court
Control of judicial selection commissions
Assisted appointment is a method of judicial selection in which a nominating commission reviews the qualifications of judicial candidates and submits a list of names to the governor, who appoints a judge from the list.[2]
At the state supreme court level, this method is further divided into the following three types, based on the makeup of the judicial nominating commissions. Those types are:
- Governor-controlled commission - The governor is either responsible for appointing a majority of the members of the nominating commission or may decline to appoint a candidate from a list provided by the nominating commission.
- Bar-controlled commission - Members of the state Bar Association are responsible for electing a majority of the members of the nominating commission.
- Hybrid - There is no majority of members chosen by either the governor or the state Bar Association. The membership of these commissions is determined by different rules in each state.
Twenty-three courts in 22 states used assisted appointment to select state supreme court justices as of June 2021.[3][4] Arizona used a governor-controlled commission. The table below shows the number of courts using each variation of assisted appointment at the state supreme court level.
| Assisted appointment methods in state supreme courts | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Method | Courts (of 23) | ||
| Governor-controlled majority | 10 | ||
| Bar-controlled majority | 1 | ||
| Hybrid | 12 | ||
About judicial selection
Each state has a unique set of guidelines governing how they select judges at the state and local level. These methods of selection are:
Election
- Partisan election: Judges are elected by the people, and candidates are listed on the ballot alongside a label designating political party affiliation.
- Nonpartisan election: Judges are elected by the people, and candidates are listed on the ballot without a label designating party affiliation.
- Michigan method: State supreme court justices are selected through nonpartisan elections preceded by either partisan primaries or conventions.
- Retention election: A periodic process whereby voters are asked whether an incumbent judge should remain in office for another term. Judges are not selected for initial terms in office using this election method.
Assisted appointment
- Assisted appointment, also known as merit selection or the Missouri Plan: A nominating commission reviews the qualifications of judicial candidates and submits a list of names to the governor, who appoints a judge from the list.[2] At the state supreme court level, this method is further divided into the following three types:
- Bar-controlled commission: Members of the state Bar Association are responsible for electing a majority of the judicial nominating commission that sends the governor a list of nominees that they must choose from.
- Governor-controlled commission: The governor is responsible for appointing a majority of the judicial nominating commission that sends the governor a list of nominees they must choose from.
- Hybrid commission: The judicial nominating commission has no majority of members chosen by either the governor or the state bar association. These commissions determine membership in a variety of ways, but no institution or organization has a clear majority control.
Direct appointment
- Court appointment: Judges are selected by judges in the state judiciary.
- Gubernatorial appointment: Judges are appointed by the governor. In some cases, approval from the legislative body is required.
- Legislative election: Judges are selected by the state legislature.
- Municipal government selection: Judges are selected by the governing body of their municipality.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Azcourts.gov, "About the Commission Members," accessed April 11, 2025
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 American Bar Association, "Judicial Selection: The Process of Choosing Judges," June 2008 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "ambaroverview" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ As of June 2021, Oklahoma had two state supreme courts: one for civil matters and one for criminal matters.
- ↑ North Dakota uses this method only for vacancies.
Federal courts:
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals • U.S. District Court: District of Arizona • U.S. Bankruptcy Court: District of Arizona
State courts:
Arizona Supreme Court • Arizona Court of Appeals • Arizona Superior Court • Arizona Justice Courts • Arizona Municipal Courts
State resources:
Courts in Arizona • Arizona judicial elections • Judicial selection in Arizona
