Vote NO on 2 Issues Press Release

What you don’t see in the TV ads:

1. Today, the Constitution says elect judges – Article VI, Sections 3 and 4 -appellate and Supremes
2. For decades, a process has been used to appoint to fill vacancies and then hold “retention elections”
3. The appointment process has consisted of a Nominating Commission taking applications and submitting 3 names to the Governor for appointment.
4. The “retention election” process has been challenged as unconstitutional and upheld by special Supreme Courts appointed by successive Governors due to conflicts .
5. Wanting to “clear up any confusion and change the Constitution to reflect practice” Amendment 2 was crafted. Many see this as a tacit admission that the current practice is NOT constitutional.
6. The ONLY change from the current practice to Amendment 2 is that the Governor nominates a judge – or justice – and ratification is made by the legislature – very much like the federal system. There is still the “retention vote” thereafter – which is the part that many have challenged as unconstitutional.

Adoption of Amendment 2 will forever remove the possibility of contested elections for appellate and supreme court judges.

The retention vote process is widely blamed for the effort to unseat the current Supreme Court in the August election. THAT PROCESS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE CONSTITUTION if Amendment 2 is adopted.

I am not making a judgment (sorry – no pun intended) here on Amendment 2, but there has not been a full discussion of the history and development surrounding this topic.