Arizona Proposition 137, End Term Limits and Retention Elections for Supreme Court Justices and Superior Court Judges Amendment (2024)
| Arizona Proposition 137 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 5, 2024 | |
| Topic Term limits and State judiciary | |
Status Defeated | |
| Type Constitutional amendment | Origin State legislature |
Arizona Proposition 137, the Arizona End Term Limits and Retention Elections for Supreme Court Justices and Superior Court Judges Amendment, was on the ballot in Arizona as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 5, 2024.[1] The ballot measure was defeated.
A "yes" vote supported this constitutional amendment to:
|
A "no" vote opposed ending term limits for state supreme court justices and superior court judges, thereby keeping the six year terms for state supreme court justices and four year terms for superior court judges. |
Election results
|
Arizona Proposition 137 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 679,824 | 22.33% | ||
|
|
2,364,888 | 77.67% | ||
Overview
What would this amendment have done?
- See also: Text of measure
The amendment would have ended term limits for state supreme court justices and superior court judges, replacing them with terms of good behavior unless decided otherwise by a judicial review commission. It would have also ended retention elections at the end of judicial terms, providing for these elections under certain circumstances, including: when a judge or justice is convicted of a felony, or a crime involving fraud and dishonesty, or when a judge or justice has a declaration of bankruptcy or foreclosure. Retention elections could have also occurred by a determination of the Commission on Judicial Performance Review.[1]
As of 2024, in Arizona, state supreme court justices had terms of six years, while superior court judges had four-year terms.[1]
How do judicial retention elections work in Arizona?
- See also: Arizona judicial elections
As of 2024, judges in Arizona were elected in retention elections and the partisan election of judges. Judges on the Arizona Supreme Court and the Arizona Court of Appeals were selected by gubernatorial appointment from a nominating commission.
In the Arizona Supreme Court, the seven justices were each appointed by the governor from a list of names compiled by the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments. The initial term of a new justice was at least two years, after which the justice stands for retention in an uncontested yes-no election. Subsequent terms lasted six years.
For Arizona superior courts, judges are elected in one of two ways. In counties with a population exceeding 250,000, judges were appointed by the governor from a list of names compiled by the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments. After an appointment, judges served for two years and then must run in a yes-no retention election in the next general election. If retained, judges would go on to serve a four-year term. If a vacancy occurred in the middle of a judge's term in a county with a population of less than 250,000, the governor appointed a judicial candidate to serve until the next general election. The winner of the nonpartisan election would serve the remainder of the unexpired term. If a vacancy occurred at the end of a judge's term, the vacancy would be filled through a nonpartisan election and the winner will serve a four-year term.
What were arguments for and against this amendment?
- See also: Support and oppostion
In support of the amendment, Bob Robb, former columnist at the Arizona Republic, said, "I think an independent judiciary is a necessary bulwark for the separation of powers and the rule of law, which is a necessary bulwark for a free society. And I have always felt that our system of retention election for judges created a huge vulnerability in maintaining an independent judiciary for there to be a truly independent judiciary. Judges can't fear political accountability for individual decisions that they make in individual cases. There does need to be the ability to influence indirectly over time judicial philosophy. There are differences in that, and the body of politics should have the ability to influence the judicial philosophy under which they are governed. But the retention election holds the possibility of seeking to have judges held politically accountable for individual decisions. And that's an attack on the independence of the judiciary."[2]
In opposition to the amendment, Catherine Sigmon, co-founder of Civic Engagement Beyond Voting, said, "The merit system of judicial selection was instituted in Arizona in 1974 by a civilian initiative. It was put on the ballot and voted for by the people of Arizona. It was improved and reinforced in the 1990s. So we have had this system of judicial retention, which is truly the gold standard in the nation. The merit selection process includes a bipartisan commission which recommends three or more justices to the governor to appoint. And then it also has a retention system that, that is a very important part of the whole process to allow the citizens of Arizona to also weigh in after a period of time on the bench."[2]
Text of measure
Ballot title
The official ballot title was as follows:[3]
| “ |
AMENDING ARTICLE VI, SECTIONS 4, 9, 12, 37, 38, 39, 41 AND 42, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA. Descriptive Title ELIMINATES JUDICIAL TERMS AND REGULAR RETENTION ELECTIONS AND NULLIFIES THE RESULTS OF THE 2024 JUDICIAL RETENTION ELECTIONS, FOR ARIZONA SUPREME COURT JUSTICES, COURT OF APPEALS JUDGES, AND SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES IN COUNTIES WITH OVER 250,000 PERSONS. ALLOWS SUCH JUSTICES AND JUDGES TO HOLD OFFICE DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR UNTIL AGE 70. [4] |
” |
Ballot summary
The official ballot summary was as follows:[3]
| “ | A "yes" vote shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution to eliminate judicial terms for judges of the Arizona Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, and judges of the Superior Court in counties with more than 250,000 people. Voters will no longer have the ability to decide whether to retain those judges at the end of their judicial terms. Those judges would instead be subject to a retention election only if they were convicted of a felony or a crime involving fraud or dishonesty; were a debtor in a bankruptcy proceeding; held a mortgage under foreclosure; or did not meet performance standards according to the Commission on Judicial Performance Review. The House of Representatives and the Senate will each be able to appoint one member to the Commission. If any legislator asks the Commission to investigate whether a judge has engaged in misconduct, the Commission must investigate that allegation. If approved, these amendments will apply retroactively such that votes cast in the November 2024 election about whether to retain a judge will not be given effect.
|
” |
Constitutional changes
- See also: Arizona Constitution
The ballot measure would have amended Article VI, Sections 4, 9, 12, 37, 38, 39, 41 and 42 of the Arizona Constitution. The following underlined text would have been added and struck-through text would have been deleted:[1]
Note: Hover over the text and scroll to see the full text.
Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring:
Article VI, section 4, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be amended as follows if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:
Supreme court; term of office
Section 4. Justices of the supreme court shall hold office for a regular term of six years DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR, except as provided by AS DETERMINED EXCLUSIVELY THROUGH THE PROVISIONS OF this article AND ARTICLES VI.I AND VIII.
Article VI, section 9, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be amended as follows if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:
Intermediate appellate courts
Section 9. The jurisdiction, powers, duties and composition of any intermediate appellate court shall be as provided by law. JUDGES OF INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURTS SHALL HOLD OFFICE DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR, AS DETERMINED EXCLUSIVELY THROUGH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ARTICLE AND ARTICLES VI.I AND VIII.
Article VI, section 12, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be amended as follows if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:
Superior court; term of office
Section 12. A. Judges of the superior court in counties having a population of less than two hundred fifty thousand persons according to the most recent United States census shall be elected by the qualified electors of their counties at the general election. They shall hold office for a regular term of four years except as provided by this section from and after the first Monday in January next succeeding their election, and until their successors are elected and qualify. The names of all candidates for judge of the superior court in such counties shall be placed on the regular ballot without partisan or other designation except the division and title of the office.
B. The governor shall fill any vacancy in such counties by appointing a person to serve until the election and qualification of a successor. At the next succeeding general election following the appointment of a person to fill a vacancy, a judge shall be elected to serve for the remainder of the unexpired term.
Judges of the superior court in counties having a population of two hundred fifty thousand persons or more according to the most recent United States census shall hold office for a regular term of four years DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR, except as provided by AS DETERMINED EXCLUSIVELY THROUGH THE PROVISIONS OF this article AND ARTICLES VI.I AND VIII.
Article VI, section 37, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be amended as follows if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:
Judicial vacancies and appointments; residence; age
Section 37. A. Within sixty days from the occurrence of a vacancy in the office of a justice or judge of any court of record, except for vacancies occurring in the office of a judge of the superior court or a judge of a court of record inferior to the superior court, the commission on appellate court appointments, if the vacancy is in the supreme court or an intermediate appellate court of record, shall submit to the governor the names of not less than three persons nominated by it to fill such vacancy, no NOT more than two of whom shall be members of the same political party unless there are more than four such nominees, in which event not more than sixty percentum PERCENT of such nominees shall be members of the same political party.
B. Within sixty days from the occurrence of a vacancy in the office of a judge of the superior court or a judge of a court of record inferior to the superior court except for vacancies occurring in the office of a judge of the superior court or a judge of a court of record inferior to the superior court in a county having a population of less than two hundred fifty thousand persons according to the most recent United States census, the commission on trial court appointments for the county in which the vacancy occurs shall submit to the governor the names of not less than three persons nominated by it to fill such vacancy, no NOT more than two of whom shall be members of the same political party unless there are more than four such nominees, in which event no NOT more than sixty per centum PERCENT of such nominees shall be members of the same political party. A nominee shall be under sixty-five years of age at the time his THE NOMINEE'S name is submitted to the governor. Judges of the superior court shall be subject to retention or rejection by a vote of the qualified electors of the county from which they were appointed at the general election UNDER THE CONDITIONS AND in the manner provided by section 38 of this article.
C. A vacancy in the office of a justice or a judge of such courts of record shall be filled by appointment by the governor without regard to political affiliation from one of the nominees whose names shall be ARE submitted to him THE GOVERNOR as hereinabove provided. In making the appointment, the governor shall consider the diversity of the state's population for an appellate court appointment and the diversity of the county's population for a trial court appointment, however the primary consideration shall be merit. If the governor does not appoint one of such nominees to fill such vacancy within sixty days after their names are submitted to the governor by such commission, the chief justice of the supreme court forthwith shall appoint on the basis of merit alone without regard to political affiliation one of such nominees to fill such vacancy. If such commission does not, within sixty days after such vacancy occurs, submit the names of nominees as hereinabove provided, the governor shall have the power to appoint any qualified person to fill such vacancy at any time thereafter prior to the time the names of the nominees to fill such vacancy are submitted to the governor as hereinabove provided. Each justice or judge so appointed shall initially hold office for a term ending sixty days following the next regular general election after the expiration of a term of two years in office. Thereafter, the terms of justices or judges of the supreme court and the superior court shall be as provided by this article.
D. A person appointed to fill a vacancy on an intermediate appellate court or another court of record now existing or hereafter established by law shall have been a resident of the counties or county in which that vacancy exists for at least one year prior to his BEFORE THE PERSON'S appointment, in addition to possessing the other required qualifications. A nominee shall be under sixty-five years of age at the time his THE NOMINEE'S name is submitted to the governor.
Article VI, section 38, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be amended as follows if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:
Declaration of candidacy; form of judicial ballot, rejection and retention; failure to file declaration
Section 38. A. A ANY justice or judge of the supreme court or an intermediate appellate court shall file in the office of the secretary of state, and a ANY judge of the superior court or other court of record including such justices or judges who are holding office as such by election or appointment at the time of the adoption of this section OR ANY AMENDMENT TO THIS SECTION except for judges of the superior court and other courts of record inferior to the superior court in counties having a population of less than two hundred fifty thousand persons, according to the United States census, shall BE SUBJECT TO A VOTE OF RETENTION ON THE OCCURRENCE OF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:
1. A FINAL CONVICTION OF A FELONY OFFENSE IF NOT OTHERWISE REMOVED PURSUANT TO ARTICLE VI.I, SECTION 3.
2. A FINAL CONVICTION OF ANY CRIME INVOLVING FRAUD OR DISHONESTY IF NOT OTHERWISE REMOVED PURSUANT TO ARTICLE VI.I, SECTION 3.
3. AN INITIATION OF PERSONAL BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS IN WHICH THE JUSTICE OR JUDGE IS A DEBTOR.
4. A FORECLOSURE OF ANY MORTGAGE FOR WHICH THE JUSTICE OR JUDGE IS A MORTGAGOR.
5. A DETERMINATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 42 OF THIS ARTICLE, BY A MAJORITY OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW, THAT THE JUSTICE OR JUDGE DOES NOT MEET JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
B. A JUSTICE OR JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OR AN INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT WHO IS SUBJECT TO A VOTE OF RETENTION PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A OF THIS SECTION SHALL FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE, AND A JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT WHO IS SUBJECT TO A VOTE OF RETENTION PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A OF THIS SECTION SHALL file in the office of the clerk of the board of supervisors of the county in which he THE JUSTICE OR JUDGE regularly sits and resides, not less than sixty nor more than ninety days prior to BEFORE the regular general election next preceding the expiration of his term of office SUBSEQUENT TO THE EVENT REQUIRING A VOTE OF RETENTION, a declaration of his THE JUSTICE'S OR JUDGE'S desire to be retained in office, and the secretary of state shall certify to the several boards of supervisors the appropriate names of the candidate or candidates appearing on such declarations filed in his THE JUSTICE'S OR JUDGE'S office, EXCEPT THAT IF THE EVENT REQUIRING A VOTE OF RETENTION OCCURS LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED TWENTY DAYS BEFORE A REGULAR GENERAL ELECTION, THE DECLARATION SHALL BE FILED NOT LESS THAN SIXTY NOR MORE THAN NINETY DAYS BEFORE THE NEXT ENSUING REGULAR GENERAL ELECTION. NOT LATER THAN ONE HUNDRED TWENTY DAYS BEFORE A REGULAR GENERAL ELECTION, THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT SHALL PROVIDE TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE A LIST OF ALL JUSTICES OR JUDGES WHO ARE SUBJECT TO A VOTE OF RETENTION AT SUCH ELECTION PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A OF THIS SECTION. THE DETERMINATION OF WHETHER A JUSTICE OR JUDGE IS SUBJECT TO RETENTION SHALL BE MADE BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT, EXCEPT THAT, WITH RESPECT TO ANY EVENT REQUIRING A VOTE OF RETENTION INVOLVING THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT, THE DETERMINATION SHALL BE MADE BY THE VICE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT.
B. C. The name of any justice or judge whose declaration is filed as provided in this section shall be placed on the appropriate official ballot at the next regular general election under a nonpartisan designation and in substantially the following form:
Shall __________, (Name of justice or judge) of the _________ court be retained in office? Yes __ No __ (Mark X after one).
C. D. If a majority of those voting on the question votes "No," then, upon the expiration of the term for which such justice or judge was serving ON JANUARY 1 OF THE YEAR FOLLOWING THE GENERAL ELECTION, a vacancy shall exist, which shall be filled as provided by this article. If a majority of those voting on the question votes "Yes," such justice or judge shall remain in office for another term, subject to removal as provided by this constitution.
D. E. The votes shall be counted and canvassed and the result declared as in the case of state and county elections, whereupon a certificate of retention or rejection of the incumbent justice or judge shall be delivered to him THE INCUMBENT by the secretary of state or the clerk of the board of supervisors, as the case may be.
E. F. If a justice or JUDGE WHO IS SUBJECT TO RETENTION PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A OF THIS SECTION fails to file a declaration of his THE JUSTICE'S OR JUDGE'S desire to be retained in office, as required by this section SUBSECTION B OF THIS SECTION, then his THE JUSTICE'S OR JUDGE'S office shall become vacant upon expiration of the term for which such justice or judge was serving ON JANUARY 1 OF THE YEAR FOLLOWING THE GENERAL ELECTION IN WHICH THE JUSTICE OR JUDGE WOULD HAVE BEEN A CANDIDATE FOR RETENTION.
G. ANY JUDGE OF AN INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT WHO IS SUBJECT TO A VOTE OF RETENTION PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE ELECTED FOR RETENTION ON A STATEWIDE BASIS AND ALL OTHERWISE ELIGIBLE REGISTERED VOTERS IN THIS STATE ARE ELIGIBLE TO VOTE ON SUCH RETENTION ELECTIONS.
Article VI, section 39, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be amended as follows if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:
Retirement of justices and judges; vacancies
Section 39. A. On attaining the age of seventy years a justice or judge of a court of record shall retire and his THE JUSTICE'S OR JUDGE'S judicial office shall be vacant, except as otherwise provided in section 35 of this article. In addition to becoming vacant as provided in this section, the office of a justice or judge of any court of record becomes vacant upon his ON THE JUSTICE'S OR JUDGE'S death or his THE JUSTICE'S OR JUDGE'S voluntary retirement pursuant to statute or his THE JUSTICE'S OR JUDGE'S voluntary resignation, and also, IF SUBJECT TO A VOTE OF RETENTION as provided in section 38 of this article, upon the expiration of his term ON JANUARY 1 OF THE YEAR next following a general election at which a majority of those voting on the question of his THE JUSTICE'S OR JUDGE'S retention vote in the negative or for which general election he THE JUSTICE OR JUDGE is required, but fails, to file a declaration of his THE JUSTICE'S OR JUDGE'S desire to be retained in office.
B. This section is alternative to and cumulative with the methods of removal of judges and justices provided in ARTICLE VI.I AND ARTICLE VIII, parts 1 and 2 of article 8 and article 6.1 of this Constitution.
Article VI, section 41, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be amended as follows if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:
Superior court divisions; commission on trial court appointments; membership; terms
Section 41. A. Except as otherwise provided, judges of the superior court in counties having a population of two hundred fifty thousand persons or more according to the most recent United States census shall hold office for a regular term of four years DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR, AS DETERMINED EXCLUSIVELY THROUGH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ARTICLE AND ARTICLES VI.I AND VIII.
B. There shall be a nonpartisan commission on trial court appointments for each county having a population of two hundred fifty thousand persons or more according to the most recent United States census which shall be composed of the following members:
1. The chief justice of the supreme court, who shall be the chairman of the commission. In the event of the absence or incapacity of the chairman the supreme court shall appoint a justice thereof to serve in his place and stead.
2. Five attorney members, none of whom shall reside in the same supervisorial district and not more than three of whom shall be members of the same political party, who are nominated by the board of governors of the state bar of Arizona and who are appointed by the governor subject to confirmation by the senate in the manner prescribed by law.
3. Ten nonattorney members, no more than two of whom shall reside in the same supervisorial district.
C. At least ninety days prior to BEFORE a term expiring or within twenty-one days of a vacancy occurring for a nonattorney member on the commission for trial court appointments, the member of the board of supervisors from the district in which the vacancy has occurred shall appoint a nominating committee of seven members who reside in the district, not more than four of whom may be from the same political party. The make-up MAKEUP of the committee shall, to the extent feasible, SHALL reflect the diversity of the population of the district. Members shall not be attorneys and shall not hold any governmental office, elective or appointive, for profit. The committee shall provide public notice that a vacancy exists and shall solicit, review and forward to the governor all applications along with the committee's recommendations for appointment. The governor shall appoint two persons from each supervisorial district who shall not be of the same political party, subject to confirmation by the senate in the manner prescribed by law.
D. In making or confirming appointments to trial court commissions, the governor, the senate and the state bar shall endeavor to see that the commission reflects the diversity of the county's population.
E. Members of the commission shall serve staggered four year terms, except that initial appointments for the five additional nonattorney members and the two additional attorney members of the commission shall be designated by the governor as follows:
1. One appointment for a nonattorney member shall be for a one-year term.
2. Two appointments for nonattorney members shall be for a two-year term.
3. Two appointments for nonattorney members shall be for a three-year term.
4. One appointment for an attorney member shall be for a one-year term.
5. One appointment for an attorney member shall be for a two-year term.
F. Vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired terms in the same manner as the original appointments.
G. Attorney members of the commission shall have resided in this state and shall have been admitted to practice in this state by the supreme court for at least five years and shall have resided in the supervisorial district from which they are appointed for at least one year. Nonattorney members shall have resided in this state for at least five years, shall have resided in the supervisorial district for at least one year before being nominated and shall not be judges, retired judges nor admitted to practice before the supreme court. None of the attorney or nonattorney members of the commission shall hold any governmental office, elective or appointive, for profit and no attorney member is eligible for appointment to any judicial office of this state until one year after membership in the commission terminates.
H. No person other than the chief justice shall serve at the same time as a member of more than one judicial appointment commission.
I. The commission shall submit the names of not less than three individuals for nomination for the office of the superior court judge pursuant to section 37 of this article.
J. Prior to BEFORE making recommendations to the governor, the commission shall conduct investigations, hold public hearings and take public testimony. An executive session as prescribed by rule may be held upon a two-thirds vote of the members of the commission in a public hearing. Final decisions as to recommendations shall be made without regard to political affiliation in an impartial and objective manner. The commission shall consider the diversity of the county's population and the geographical distribution of the residences of the judges throughout the county, however the primary consideration shall be merit. Voting shall be in a public hearing. The expenses of meetings of the commission and the attendance of members thereof for travel and subsistence shall be paid from the general fund of the state as state officers are paid, upon claims approved by the chairman.
K. After public hearings the supreme court shall adopt rules of procedure for the commission on trial court appointments.
L. The members of the commission who were appointed pursuant to section 36 of this article prior to the effective date of this section may continue to serve until the expiration of their normal terms. All subsequent appointments shall be made as prescribed by this section.
Article VI, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be amended by adding section 42 as follows if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:
Judicial performance review; standards
Section 42. A. The supreme court shall adopt, after public hearings, and administer for all justices and JUDGES OF THE INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURTS AND judges who file a declaration to be retained in office, OF THE SUPERIOR COURT IN A COUNTY WITH A POPULATION OF TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND PERSONS OR MORE ACCORDING TO THE MOST RECENT UNITED STATES CENSUS OR IN A COUNTY WITH A POPULATION OF LESS THAN TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND PERSONS ACCORDING TO THE MOST RECENT UNITED STATES CENSUS THAT CHOOSES TO SELECT ITS JUDGES OF THE SUPERIOR COURT AS IF IT HAD A POPULATION OF TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND PERSONS OR MORE a COMMISSION AND process, established by court rules for evaluating judicial performance. The rules shall PROVIDE THAT EACH JUSTICE OR JUDGE SHALL BE EVALUATED NOT LESS FREQUENTLY THAN EVERY FOUR YEARS FROM THE YEAR OF FIRST APPOINTMENT, AND SHALL include written performance standards and performance reviews which survey opinions of persons who have knowledge of the justice's or judge's performance.
B. A MAJORITY OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SHALL APPOINT ONE MEMBER TO THE COMMISSION AND A MAJORITY OF THE SENATE SHALL APPOINT ONE MEMBER TO THE COMMISSION. THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATE HAVE COMPLETE DISCRETION IN APPOINTING MEMBERS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, AND SUCH MEMBERS SHALL HAVE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES EQUAL TO ALL OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
C. UPON WRITTEN REQUEST OF A LEGISLATOR, THE COMMISSION SHALL INVESTIGATE AN ALLEGATION THAT A JUSTICE OR JUDGE HAS ENGAGED IN A PATTERN OF MALFEASANCE IN OFFICE. IF THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT THE JUSTICE OR JUDGE HAS ENGAGED IN A PATTERN OF MALFEASANCE IN OFFICE, THE COMMISSION SHALL MAKE A DETERMINATION THAT THE JUSTICE OR JUDGE DOES NOT MEET JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
D. The public shall be afforded a full and fair opportunity for participation in the evaluation process through public hearings, dissemination of evaluation reports to voters and any other methods as the court deems advisable. [4]
Readability score
- See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2024
Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The attorney general wrote the ballot language for this measure.
The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 13, and the FRE is 15. The word count for the ballot title is 74.
The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 11, and the FRE is 45. The word count for the ballot summary is 203.
Support
Supporters
Officials
- State Sen. David Gowan (R)
- State Rep. Alexander Kolodin (R)
Arguments
Opposition
Opponents
Officials
- State Sen. Flavio Bravo (D)
- State Rep. Cesar Aguilar (D)
- State Rep. Analise Ortiz (D)
- State Rep. Laura Terech (D)
- Tucson Mayor Regina Romero (D)
Political Parties
- Arizona Working Families Party
- Libertarian Party of Arizona
Organizations
Arguments
Campaign finance
Ballotpedia did not identify ballot measure committees registered to support or oppose the ballot measure.[5]
| Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Support | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| Oppose | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| Total | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
Polls
- See also: 2024 ballot measure polls
- Are you aware of a poll on this ballot measure that should be included below? You can share ballot measure polls, along with source links, with us at editor@ballotpedia.org.
| Arizona Proposition 137, End Term Limits and Retention Elections for Supreme Court Justices and Superior Court Judges Amendment (2024) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noble Predictive Insights | 8/12/24-8/16/24 | 1003 RV | ± 3.09% | 31% | 38% | 24% |
| Question: "Prop 137, the End Term Limits and Retention Elections for Supreme Court Justices and Superior Court Judges Amendment, will appear on the ballot in 2024. If passed, this measure will end term limits for Supreme Court and Superior Court justices, replacing them with terms of good behavior. If the election were held today, how would you vote on this ballot measure?" | ||||||
Note: LV is likely voters, RV is registered voters, and EV is eligible voters.
Background
Arizona judicial elections
Judges in Arizona were elected in retention elections and the partisan election of judges. Judges on the Arizona Supreme Court and the Arizona Court of Appeals were selected by gubernatorial appointment from a nominating commission.[6]
Arizona Supreme Court
- See also: Arizona Supreme Court
The seven justices on the Arizona Supreme Court were each appointed by the governor from a list of names compiled by the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments. The commission is composed of 16 members who serve staggered four-year terms. The membership included 10 non-attorneys, five attorneys, and the chief justice of the supreme court, who chairs the commission.[7]
The initial term of a new justice was at least two years, after which the justice stood for retention in an uncontested yes-no election. Subsequent terms lasted six years.[8]
Arizona Court of Appeals
- See also: Arizona Court of Appeals
The 22 judges of the Arizona Court of Appeals were appointed by the governor from a list of names compiled by the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments. The commission was composed of 16 members who serve staggered four-year terms. The membership included 10 non-attorneys, five attorneys, and the chief justice of the supreme court, who chaired the commission.[9]
The initial term of a new judge was at least two years, after which the judge stood for retention in an uncontested yes-no election. Subsequent terms lasted six years.[10]
The court of appeals was divided into two divisions. Sixteen judges are in Division One and were based in Phoenix, Arizona. The other six judges were in Division Two and are based in Tucson, Arizona.[11]
Arizona Superior Courts
- See also: Arizona Superior Courts
Judges of the Arizona Superior Court were selected in one of two ways:
- In counties with a population exceeding 250,000, judges were appointed by the governor from a list of names compiled by the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments.
- Coconino, Pima, Pinal, and Maricopa counties use this method. The state constitution provided for other counties to adopt merit selection through a ballot initiative, which Coconino County did in 2018.[12]
- After an appointment, judges served for two years and then must run in a yes-no retention election in the next general election. If retained, judges would go on to serve a four-year term.[13][14]
- If a vacancy occurred in the middle of a judge's term in a county with a population of less than 250,000, the governor would appoint a judicial candidate to serve until the next general election. The winner of the nonpartisan election would serve the remainder of the unexpired term. If a vacancy occurred at the end of a judge's term, the vacancy would be filled through a nonpartisan election and the winner would serve a four-year term.[15]
Arizona Commission on Judicial Performance Review
The Arizona Commission on Judicial Performance Review, also known as the JPR Commission, was an independent state commission in Arizona established by the Arizona Constitution that plays a role in the state's judicial selection process. The Commission was formed in 1992 by a state constitutional amendment passed by voters. According to its website, The JPR Commission “was created to conduct the periodic performance reviews of appointed judges required by the Constitution, and “sets standards for judicial performance including whether judges can apply the law fairly, treat people with respect and manage a courtroom.”[16]
The JPR Commission had 34 members who are either private citizens, attorneys, or judges that are selected by the Arizona Supreme Court. Once appointed by the Court, Commission members served a four-year term or the remainder of an unexpired four-year term.
Path to the ballot
Amending the Arizona Constitution
- See also: Amending the Arizona Constitution
A simple majority vote is required during one legislative session for the Arizona State Legislature to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot. That amounts to a minimum of 31 votes in the Arizona House of Representatives and 16 votes in the Arizona State Senate, assuming no vacancies. Amendments do not require the governor's signature to be referred to the ballot.
Amendment in the state Legislature
The amendment, Senate Concurrent Resolution 1044, was introduced to the Arizona State Senate on February 5, 2024. It passed the Senate on March 6, 2024, by a 16-14 vote. The House amended the measure and passed it by 31-29 on June 12, 2024. The Senate passed the measure again on June 12, 2024, by 16-10.[1]
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lawsuit
On June 21, 2024, Progress Arizona filed a lawsuit with the Arizona Superior Court of Maricopa County to remove the measure from the ballot, saying that the title of the measure was deceptive to voters. The lawsuit said, "SCR 1044 was referred to the ballot only in June 2024 and uses the title Judicial Accountability Act. Nothing in SCR 1044 provides any judicial accountability. Having this measure on the ballot along with a number of judges and justices being up for retention, particularly in light of the fact that this measure actually nullifies all of those elections if it passes is likely to lead to voter confusion."[17]
A Yavapai County Superior Court judge ruled against Progress Arizona, saying the measure complied with the single subject rule. Progress Arizona appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court.[18] On August 22, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that the measure complied with the single subject rule and could remain on the ballot.[19]
How to cast a vote
- See also: Voting in Arizona
See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in Arizona.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Arizona Legislature, "AZ SCR1044," accessed March 9, 2024
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 KJZZ, "The arguments for and against judicial retention elections in Arizona," May 1, 2024
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Arizona Secretary of State, "Official Ballot Measure Language," accessed July 27, 2024
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ Arizona Secretary of State, "Election Funds Portal," accessed July 10, 2024
- ↑ American Judicature Society, "Methods of Judicial Selection: Arizona," archived October 2, 2014
- ↑ Arizona Judicial Branch, "Article 6, Section 36: Commission on appellate court appointments and terms, appointments and vacancies on commission," accessed March 24, 2023
- ↑ Arizona Judicial Branch, "Article 6, Section 37: Judicial vacancies and appointments; initial terms; residence; age," accessed March 24, 2023
- ↑ Arizona Judicial Branch, "Article 6, Section 36: Commission on appellate court appointments and terms, appointments and vacancies on commission," accessed March 24, 2023
- ↑ Arizona Judicial Branch, "Article 6, Section 37: Judicial vacancies and appointments; initial terms; residence; age," accessed March 24, 2023
- ↑ Arizona Judicial Branch, "Court of Appeals," accessed March 24, 2023
- ↑ Arizona Judicial Branch, "About the Commission Members," accessed March 24, 2023
- ↑ Arizona Judicial Branch, "Superior Court," accessed March 24, 2023
- ↑ Arizona Judicial Branch, "Article 6, Section 37: Judicial vacancies and appointments; initial terms; residence; age," accessed March 24, 2023
- ↑ Brennan Center for Justice, "Judicial Selection: An Interactive Map," accessed March 23, 2023
- ↑ AZcourts.gov, "Arizona Judicial Performance Review," accessed November 12, 2021
- ↑ Document Cloud, "SCR1044 lawsuit," June 21, 2024
- ↑ AZ Mirror, "Progressive group asks AZ Supreme Court to block ballot measure giving judges lifetime appointments," August 16, 2024
- ↑ AZ Mirror, "Voters will get to decide whether to give AZ judges virtual lifetime appointments," August 22, 2024
- ↑ Arizona Revised Statutes, "Title 16, Section 565," accessed July 18, 2024
- ↑ Arizona generally observes Mountain Standard Time; however, the Navajo Nation observes daylight saving time. Because of this, Mountain Daylight Time is sometimes observed in Arizona.
- ↑ 22.0 22.1 22.2 Arizona Secretary of State, "Voters," accessed July 18, 2024
- ↑ Arizona Secretary of State, "Arizona Voter Registration Instructions," accessed July 18, 2024
- ↑ Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
- ↑ ArizonaElections.gov, "What ID Do I Need to Vote Quiz," accessed October 3, 2025
- ↑ Arizona State Legislature, “Arizona Revised Statutes 16-579,” accessed October 3, 2025
 |
State of Arizona Phoenix (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
