Supreme Weekly: High courts in Vermont, Arkansas, New Mexico and New Jersey

---

This article may not adhere to Ballotpedia’s current neutrality policies.

---

May 26, 2011

by: Katy Farrell

This week a major ruling reasserted the Supreme Court's dominance in New Jersey, two State Supreme Court justices announced their retirements and lawmakers in New Mexico took the governor to court.

VERMONT

Justice Denise Johnson announced yesterday that she will retire from the Vermont Supreme Court, effective August 31, 2011. Johnson was appointed to the court in 1990 and was the first woman to serve in the position. Prior to joining the court, she was Chair of the Vermont Human Rights Commission for two years.

The governor will appoint a successor for Johnson from a list created by the judicial nominating commission. From there, the new justice must be confirmed by the Vermont Senate. Of her replacement, Johnson says, "Whoever takes the job will find it is a humbling position to be in. And you have to work hard."

ARKANSAS

Last Thursday, Justice Jim Gunter announced that he will not seek re-election to the Arkansas Supreme Court when his term expires next year. A few days later, Judge of the Arkansas Court of Appeals Raymond Abramson, announced his candidacy for the seat. Appointed to the intermediate appellate court by Governor Mike Beebe last year, Abrahamson announced on the first possible day, exactly one year before the 2012 primary election. During the announcement, he said, "Being a country lawyer for 34 years was the perfect laboratory to prepare me for service on the Arkansas Court of Appeals, where I have been privileged to learn the art of appellate judging. The Book of Isaiah, Chapter 1, Verse 18, perfectly describes my work on the Court of Appeals: ‘Come now, let us reason together.’”

NEW JERSEY

The New Jersey Supreme Court announced a much anticipated ruling on Tuesday regarding how the state funds its school system. In spite of Governor Christie's vocal opposition to increasing moneys for the states' low-income school districts, the court ruled 3-2 that the current system is unconstitutional. Earlier, the governor suggested that he might ignore the ruling if it was not decided in his favor, but now implies that he will comply with the decision. He did have some strong words about it, saying, "I believe that this decision represents everything that’s wrong with how Trenton has historically operated and everything that I’m here to fight to change."

The decision has also reaffirmed the governor's goal of appointing justices that adhere to his agenda. After this week's ruling, Christie said, "I'm going to appoint people who I believe understand their job, which is to interpret the law and not make law from the bench." Though the standoff over judicial nominations between the governor and New Jersey Senate was recently resolved, it seems we should expect more in the future.

NEW MEXICO

In the state, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Ben Lujan, and his fellow Democrats are suing Governor Susana Martinez over her use of a line-item veto on two separate pieces of legislation. This week, the group of legislators petitioned the New Mexico Supreme Court to invalidate the vetoes. Lujan said, "I think it's important that the courts have a look at it. The separation of powers is very important."

The issue revolves around whether the vetoes were unconstitutional. They would violate the separation of powers doctrine if the original intent of the bill was compromised. In this instance, the Democratic lawmakers contend that it was, since the governor vetoed the provision that called for an increased tax to businesses to the state unemployment fund, though allowed reductions in jobless benefits to stand. The governor's office defended the vetoes.

See also

• Supreme Weekly: Recent rulings and a state judge goes federal
• Judgepedia's Supreme Weekly: The States