Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

Proposed amendment to set deadline for Senate judicial confirmations

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

September 22, 2010

Trenton, New Jersey: New Jersey Assemblyman Michael Carroll (R-Morris) proposed a constitutional amendment that would require the state Senate to vote on judicial nominations within 60 days. The amendment states that, if the Senate does not vote within the timeframe, the nomination will automatically be considered approved.

This proposition comes in light of recent controversy surrounding Supreme Court nominee Anne Murray Patterson. She was appointed by Gov. Christie in May of 2010 to replace incumbent Justice John Wallace. Traditionally, the Governor is expected to reappoint incumbent justices. The Democratic-controlled Senate[1] has delayed confirmation of Patterson as a way to retaliate against Gov. Christie, whom they believe acted out-of-line in dismissing Wallace.

According to Assemblyman Carroll, “It’s simply a disgrace the Senate permits pique and petty personal politics to stand in the way of doing the job the people expect them to do...This amendment would ensure that such a travesty never happens again." However, those opposed to the amendment claim that Carroll is overstepping his jurisdiction. Derek Roseman, the communications director for the Senate Majority Office, stated, "Last time I checked the constitution, the Assembly plays no role in the nomination process. Perhaps the Assemblyman should remain concerned with what's going on in the house to which he was elected, instead of trying to inject himself into the one to which he was not."[2][3]

Footnotes