Judicial selection in Arizona
|Judicial selection in Arizona|
|Arizona Supreme Court|
|Method:||Comm. select., Gov. appt.|
|Arizona Court of Appeals|
|Method:||Comm. select., Gov. appt.|
|Arizona Superior Court|
|Method:||Comm. select., Gov. appt. or non-partisan elections|
|Arizona Justice Courts|
|Method:||Partisan election of judges|
Arizona judges are selected using a variety of different methods.
Justices of the Arizona Supreme Court and Arizona Court of Appeals are chosen via a commission selected, political appointment method. This is commonly referred to as Merit selection or the Missouri Plan.
When a vacancy on the court is announced, potential justices submit applications to the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments. Once this group has chosen a slate of nominees for a vacancy that has occurred, the governor picks one from that list.
|Arizona is one of twenty-one states in which the Chief Justice is elected by other justices.|
The newly appointed justice initially stands for retention in the next general election more than two years after taking office. If she or he is retained by voters, the justice then serves a full six year term. 
The high court was established in Article 6 of the Arizona Constitution. It was ratified in December 1910, 14 months before Arizona achieved statehood.
1960 Modern Courts Amendment
Alterations made to the Supreme Court in this 1960 constitutional amendment created the modern court.
- Gave the Supreme Court administrative supervision over the state judiciary;
- Allowed the body to make procedural rules of court;
- Increased the number of justices from three to five;
- Allowed for creation of the Arizona Court of Appeals;
- Set the mandatory retirement age at 70; and
- Restricted judicial officers from holding other offices concurrently. 
1974 Proposition 108
Almost fifteen years since it was first proposed, voters approved Proposition 108, which changed judicial selection in the state. Formerly utilizing a method of popular elections, this ballot measure established the Commission-selection, political appointment method of judicial selection still in use. This changed the way judges were selected for the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, and Superior Courts in counties with a population exceeding 150,000. 
Judges of the Arizona Superior Court are selected in one of two ways.
- In counties with a population exceeding 250,000, judges are selected through the Commission-selection, political appointment method of judicial selection. Pima and Maricopa county residents have their judges selected this way.
- In the state's other 13 counties, judges are selected in the Non-partisan election of judges.
Judges selected through either method serve a four year term. 
The Superior Court was established by the Arizona Legislature following statehood in 1912. All the judges of this level of the courts were elected via popular election until the passage of Proposition 108 in 1974. At that time, counties with populations exceeding 150,000 would select judges through the same process as the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals. In 1992, the population limit was increased to 250,000. These numbers have only ever included Pima and Maricopa counties. 
Justices of the Peace are elected to four year terms in partisan elections.
Qualifications for judgeships
- Supreme Court:
- Resident of Arizona
- Licensed to practice law for 10 years
- Court of Appeals and Superior Court:
- At least 30 years old
- Resident of Arizona
- Licensed to practice law for five years
- Local resident for one year
All justices and judges have a mandatory retirement age of 70 in Arizona.
In the first quarter of 2011, fifteen bills having to do with judicial selection were introduced in the Arizona Legislature. All of the proposals intended to change or end merit selection in the state. 
Of those House and Senate Bills, only one has emerged to make it onto the ballot in 2012: the Arizona Judicial Selection Amendment (2012). If approved by voters, this constitutional amendment will:
- increase Supreme Court, Court of Appeals and Pima and Maricopa Superior Court judges' terms from six to eight years (for terms beginning after January 1, 2013).
- increase the retirement age from 70 to 75.
- alter the composition of the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments. Currently the Bar Association nominates five attorneys to serve and the governor appoints them. The new method would allow the governor to appoint four members, while the Bar Association appoints one attorney.
- determine that the nominating commission submit at least eight nominees for a vacancy, unless two vacancies occur on the same court simultaneously, in which case the commission must nominate at least six nominees for each.
- eliminates the differences in term lengths and non-attorney members of the commission. 
Arizona voters will decide whether to pass this constitutional amendment in the November 6, 2012 general election.
During period, nineteen bills were submitted to eliminate merit selection in Arizona. According to the authors of "On the Validity and Vitality of Arizona's Judicial Merit Selection System: Past, Present and Future", one impetus for these bills was the Arizona Supreme Court ruling in Bennett v. Napolitano. In this case, the high court ruled that state legislators lacked standing to challenge the governor's line item vetoes to the budget. 
The authors are concluding that
- Section 36 of Article 6 of the Arizona Constitution
- Section 41 of Article 6 of the Arizona Constitution
- News: Arizona voters will vote on changes to judicial selection
- Arizona judicial elections
- Courts in Arizona
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 American Judicature Society, Methods of Judicial Selection: Arizona
- ↑ Arizona Republic, "Thomas charges chief judge with crimes", December 10, 2009
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Arizona Judicial Branch, Arizona Courts: The Historical Perspective
- ↑ Arizona Proposition 108 (1974)
- ↑ Arizona Courts, Arizona Courts Judicial Vacancy, and Appointment and Election Information
- ↑ National Center for the State courts, Gavel to Gavel: "Special Edition: Merit Selection," April 14, 2011
- ↑ Arizona State Legislature, Senate Concurrent Resolution 1001
- ↑ FindLaw.com, Bennett v. Napolitano