A bill was introduced yesterday to change the election system for Supreme Court (and Court of Appeal) justices. ACA 8 would amend the state constitution to authorize the Legislature to “provide by statute that the name of a judge of the Supreme Court or a court of appeal who files a declaration of candidacy shall not appear on the ballot, and instead the judge shall be deemed elected, unless a petition requesting that the judge’s name appear on the ballot is filed by a requisite number of registered voters qualified to vote for the office.”
Currently, article VI, section 16, requires a justice to stand for election when their term is expiring. It’s an uncontested election, when voters decide only “yes” or “no” whether the justice should continue on the bench (see Elections Code section 13210), but the justice can’t avoid being on the ballot. (For details about the election system, including the difference between an appointee and a nominee, see here.)
The proposed constitutional amendment would make Supreme Court and Court of Appeal justice elections somewhat similar to elections for sitting superior court judges. Section 16 says the Legislature can “provide that an unopposed [superior court] incumbent’s name not appear on the ballot.” The Legislature has so provided (Elec. Code section 8203) and most superior court judges are unopposed and don’t appear on the ballot when they seek reelection.
ACA 8 was introduced by Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, who served as the chief elections official in Santa Cruz County for over 25 years.
A Judicial Council spokesperson said, “we’re aware of the bill and will be reviewing it as part of our bill review process.”
Related:
The specter of more frequent “100-year floods”
“Thirty Years After a Hundred Year Flood: Judicial Elections and the Administration of Justice”
