Between the lines: Picking the judges

Calls for changing Supreme Court justice process grow

Listen up, Arkansas.

Voters in this state may be asked, possibly as soon as November, to alter the way Arkansas Supreme Court justices are chosen.

The public discussion begins in earnest this week as a legislative committee takes up the issue today.

State Sen. Jeremy Hutchinson, R-Little Rock and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, sees an opportunity to move away from the popular election of justices and called the meeting of his committee to push for inclusion of the necessary legislation in a special legislative session later this year.

He supports a proposal by Rep. Matthew Shepherd, R-El Dorado, for a merit selection process. A panel would nominate candidates to fill vacancies, leaving the final selection to the governor, under such a system.

Hutchinson is not the only one stirred to action on the issue. Lots of people have been talking about ending the election of the justices.

His uncle, Gov. Asa Hutchinson, has also signaled interest in a change in the way justices are selected.

Less clear is whether the governor would add this issue to the agenda of a special session later this year.

A lot depends on how successful a different special session scheduled to begin April 6 on Medicaid expansion goes. It will precede the Legislature's fiscal session and strongly impact the state's budget moving forward.

A second special session, expected to focus on highway funding, is supposed come later and could include several other issues, including this one.

Advocates for changing the judicial selection process are motivated by the experience in this year's elections of two justices, including the next chief justice, when "dark money" flooded the state's judicial election campaigns.

Once again, a record-setting amount of out-of-state money influenced the elections in Arkansas. Spending reportedly doubled the previous record for a judicial election in this state.

The candidates themselves, whose contributors are reported, and outside groups, whose donors are not known to voters, filled the airways with more than $1.3 million in TV ads in the two races.

Most of the spending went to the contest in which Circuit Judge Dan Kemp defeated sitting Justice Courtney Goodson for chief justice. The dark money came from groups like the Judicial Crisis Network, which spent heavily against Goodson.

Goodson, who still has two years in her associate justice term and has said she opposes ending the election of Supreme Court justices, is among those scheduled to speak at Wednesday's hearing.

So are Associate Justice Karen Baker and representatives from the Arkansas Trial Lawyers Association and the Arkansas Bar Association.

Also vying for a spot on a special session agenda -- and included for discussion by the Senate Judiciary Committee this week -- is a proposal from Rep. Clarke Tucker, D-Little Rock, to regulate dark money and electioneering by candidates.

He said he offered it so new campaign finance laws could be in place for the November election cycle this year.

The Supreme Court elections are effectively over, since there are no runoffs, but Tucker's proposal could impact other races.

Hutchinson contends there isn't as much urgency for Tucker's bill as for the change in how justices are chosen. That change requires passage of a constitutional amendment, which can only be considered by voters at a general election.

Acting on a proposal in a special session could speed it to the 2016 general election. Otherwise, the issue couldn't reach voters until 2018.

Hutchinson wants lawmakers to reach consensus quickly on a replacement plan and push the issue to the November ballot.

He has a point in that a quick vote would catch voters at a time when they might remember better how heavily the March 1 elections were influenced by dark money.

But hasty approval of a proposed constitutional amendment might not serve this state well.

That's a long-term fix that deserves thorough examination, especially when it comes to the makeup of this panel that would nominate candidates for the governor's consideration.

It is hard to believe lawmakers, not to mention the public, can give the issue the required attention amid all else on the Legislature's platter right now.

Besides, Hutchinson really needn't worry about voters remembering what influence dark money has been having on elections. Just give them a chance and they'll readily support that reform.

Commentary on 03/30/2016

Upcoming Events