Brief (1)
SCR 1604 would amend the Judicial Article of the Kansas Constitution to require the nonpartisan appointment of all district judges.
SCR 1604 also requires the establishment of a commission charged with evaluating all appellate and district court judges and with disseminating this information. The commission shall have lawyer and nonlawyer members appointed in equal numbers by the Governor and the Supreme Court, with terms prescribed by the Legislature. The Governor shall appoint one of the members to serve as chairman.
The commission shall establish a written uniform statewide plan for evaluating the performance of all appellate and district court judges. It shall adopt rules providing for the dissemination of information to the public on the performance of an appellate or district judge prior to the judge's retention election.
The public shall be afforded a full and fair opportunity for participation in the evaluation process and the commission by its rules shall establish procedures for surveying the opinions of persons who have knowledge of the judge's performance, and for establishing local judicial evaluation committees to assist it.
Background
The proposed constitutional amendment was recommended by the Kansas Citizens Justice Initiative established in 1997 by order of the Kansas Supreme Court and the Kansas Justice Commission which was a part of the initiative. The 46-member Commission headed by Jill Docking and the late Robert Bennett, former Governor of Kansas, made its recommendations in June 1999. Members of the Commission were appointed by the Chief Justice, the Governor, and the leaders of the Judiciary Committees of the Legislature.
The 1999 Interim Special Committee on Judiciary recommended the introduction of the proposed constitutional amendment in the 2000 Legislature.
The proposed constitutional amendment was supported by Kansans for an Independent Judiciary co-chaired by Jill Docking and Fred Logan; several district court judges, representatives of the Kansas Appleseed Center for Law and Justice; the Kansas Trial Lawyers Association; the Kansas Chamber of Commerce and Industry; and others.
Proponents said that the nonpartisan selection of judges would take partisan politics out of the selection of judges, eliminate potential conflict of interest situations in the administration of justice, and restore more confidence in the judiciary.
Four states, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, and Utah, now have a statewide judicial performance evaluation program.
Opponents included an attorney from Garnett, Senator Pugh, and others. Opponents said the current system allowing voters to determine the partisan or nonpartisan selection of judges by judicial district worked well and that there was no citizen support for the change suggested. They said the nonpartisan selection of judges does not take politics out of the process, but only makes it less observable and provides less accountability for judges.
Currently, 14 judicial districts elect 114 judges (both district and magistrate) on a partisan basis. There are 17 judicial districts where 120 judges are selected on a nonpartisan basis.
1. *Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at http://www.ink.org/public/legislative/fulltext.cgi