New proposal calls for appointing state judges

The 2008 Judicial Performance Survey's question on election versus appointment, expressed in layman terms: Would you be in favor of or opposed to amending the state constitution so that judges would be appointed by the governor, who would choose from a short list of candidates who had been reviewed and selected by a nominating commission?

As part of the arrangement described in the survey question, once a judge is appointed, he or she would retain the seat through retention election. That means an incumbent would run against his or her record, not an opponent.

If a judge failed in a retention election to reach a predetermined level of approval by voters, then a new appointed judge would replace the incumbent.

States set the bar for approval at varying levels; a proposal now circulating in Nevada calls for 55-percent voter approval to retain a judge.

The pending proposal is called Senate Joint Resolution 2. Its sponsor, Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio (R-Reno) is a lawyer himself, and has sponsored several failed attempts to amend the constitution in order to switch from electing to appointing judges.

Raggio's present resolution for appointing all district court judges and Supreme Court justices reflects the state's present system of appointing judges for midterm vacancies. His resolution has to pass the 2009 Nevada Legislature before it can go to voters in 2010.

If Nevada starts appointing judges, the state's Commission on Judicial Selection would screen candidates, then draw up a list of three names for each judge's slot, from which the governor would make appointments.

But the Selection Commission would expand in size. Currently, the commission has seven permanent members to nominate candidates for Supreme Court vacancies.

A formula spells out the distribution of members between lawyers and non-lawyers. That would go up to nine members, if voters approve the appointment method.

To fill district court vacancies now, the commission expands temporarily by two members, who must reside in the district involved.

If voters approve the amendment, the commission would instead add four temporary members, all residents of the district that has a vacancy.

Raggio's plan also calls for creation of another state body, a Commission on Judicial Performance -- whose members also would be a mix of attorneys and non-attorneys -- to review sitting judges before they run for retention. The new commission's reviews would be made public.

Even if Raggio's plan to switch to appointed judges fails, the Supreme Court on its own can set up rules to launch a Commission on Judicial Performance, Supreme Court spokesman Bill Gang said.

In that case, the new commission's reviews would help voters evaluate incumbent judges running against actual opponents.

Contact reporter Joan Whitely at jwhitely@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0268.