Misplaced Pages

#612387

20-537: Headed by the attorney general of Arizona, the Arizona Attorney General's Office is the largest law office in the state, with approximately 400 attorneys and 1,000 employees. As of 2019, the Attorney General's Office is divided into the following divisions: The Arizona Constitution requires all of the officers in the state's executive department, including the attorney general, to be at least 25 years old,

40-479: A U.S. citizen for 10 years and an Arizona resident for five years. Arizona law further requires the attorney general to have been a "practicing attorney before the supreme court of the state" for at least five years before taking office, however the Arizona Supreme Court ruled the law unconstitutional during the appointment process of Jack LaSota in 1977; LaSota had not renewed his state bar membership and

60-554: A few other circumstances as outlined in the Arizona Constitution. A quorum is three, but the whole court must sit in order to declare a law unconstitutional. The Chief Justice is chosen for a five-year term by the court, and is eligible for re-election. They supervise the administration of all the inferior courts. They are Chairman of the Commission on Appellate Court Appointments, which nominates candidates to fill vacancies in

80-499: A list of candidates — the judges on the ballot do not have opponents. Rather, the voter chooses between electing the incumbent judge to a further term in office (i.e. voting in favor of "retention") or voting against. They are usually nonpartisan, as the judge's party affiliation , if any, typically is not listed on the ballot. A judge is deemed to have been retained if ballots cast in favor of retention outnumber those against. By way of example, judicial retention elections are used in

100-524: A list of nominees to the governor. The governor is required by law to appoint from this list based on merit, without regard to party affiliation. Justices are then retained for an initial period, after which they are subject to a retention election . If the justice wins the election, their term is six years. Between February to April 2024, the Arizona Senate (with all Republican state senators approving and all Democratic state senators objecting) passed

120-506: A majority of votes would be elected to serve. (1) Within 30 days before August 16 preceding the expiration of the judge's term, a judge of the Supreme Court or a court of appeal may file a declaration of candidacy to succeed to the office presently held by the judge. If the declaration is not filed, the Governor before September 16 shall nominate a candidate. At the next general election, only

140-547: A resolution to change the Arizona Supreme Court term length from six years to lifelong, which would apply retroactively and override the result of the November 2024 Arizona Supreme Court retention elections; the resolution was approved by Arizona House of Representatives and is awaiting voter approval. The current Arizona Supreme Court includes: Retention election A retention election or retention referendum

160-409: Is a referendum where voters are asked if an office holder , usually a judge , should be allowed to continue in that office. The judge is removed from office if a majority of votes are cast against retention. Retention elections are held periodically, usually at the same time as a general election . A judicial retention vote differs from a regular election in that voters are not asked to choose from

180-493: Is appointed by the governor of Arizona from a list recommended by a bipartisan commission. Justices stand for retention in an election two years after their appointment and then every six years. They must retire at age 70. The court started in 1912 with three justices. Alfred Franklin , Donald L. Cunningham , and Henry D. Ross took office on February 14, 1912. In 1949, the Court expanded from three to five justices. In 2016 it

200-464: The Supreme Court of Japan . Retention elections are used in many U.S. state court systems to retain trial court and appellate court judges. The following 20 states use retention elections for at least some judges: Appellate court retention election Trial court retention election Many legal scholars disapprove of any form of judicial elections on the grounds that they may undermine

220-486: The governor , who would choose a candidate. It was noted that the Missouri Plan needed a form of public accountability so it was decided that, after an election cycle had passed, the judicial candidate would be subject to periodic, public retention elections. The Constitution of Japan , drafted by the U.S. authorities during the occupation of Japan following World War II , effected a similar arrangement for justices of

SECTION 10

#1732851654613

240-582: The U.S. state of Illinois . In the 2008 general election , the voters of Cook County, Illinois were asked to vote on the following: Shall each of the persons listed be retained in office as Judge of the Appellate Court, First Judicial District? Michael J. Gallagher, Yes or No Margaret Stanton McBride, Yes or No Additional instructions on the ballot made clear that "no judge listed is running against any other judge" and that voters were able to vote "yes" on both, "no" on both, or "yes" on one and "no" on

260-578: The appellate courts. If the Governor fails to appoint one of the nominated candidates within sixty days of their names being submitted to her or him, the Chief Justice makes the appointment. The Vice Chief Justice, who acts as Chief Justice in the latter's "absence or incapacity," is chosen by the court for a term determined by the court. Justices are selected by a modified form of the Missouri Plan . A bipartisan commission considers applicants and sends

280-502: The attorney general of Arizona, through the Arizona Department of Law, shall:     Democratic (17)     Republican (10) Arizona Supreme Court The Arizona Supreme Court is the state supreme court of the U.S. state of Arizona . Sitting in the Supreme Court building in downtown Phoenix , the court consists of a chief justice , a vice chief justice, and five associate justices . Each justice

300-483: The candidate so declared or nominated may appear on the ballot, which shall present the question whether the candidate shall be elected. The candidate shall be elected upon receiving a majority of the votes on the question. In 1937, the American Bar Association endorsed retention elections for judges. Growing distaste of politics and corruption affecting the gubernatorial appointments of judges brought about

320-484: The independence of the courts and encourage judges to act as politicians. It is argued that of the three branches of government (legislature, executive, and judiciary) the judicial branch should be the least concerned with public opinion, but that retention elections cause judges to take into account the view of the electorate when deciding cases. It is also argued that retention elections may lead to corruption because to successfully run for public office money and campaigning

340-535: The other. In 1934, Judicial retention elections were first used by California 's state court system to fill vacancies. (Text of the law may be seen below.) These retention elections served as an alternative to elections which were previously contested. After appointment by the governor and confirmation by the Commissioner on Judicial Appointments, an incumbent judge would appear on the ballot without an opponent and voters would vote for or against. Judges receiving

360-509: The reform when selecting judges. In 1940, the state of Missouri adopted the Missouri Plan, which contained a judicial retention process similar to that of California . This plan which is also known as the merit system, was proposed by Albert M. Kales , co-founder of the American Judicature Society. Under the Missouri Plan, judges were to be nominated by a council of lawyers and laypersons . A list of candidates would then go to

380-573: Was further expanded from five to seven justices. This expansion was criticized at the time by some as court packing . The jurisdiction of the court is prescribed by Article VI, Section 5 of the Arizona Constitution . Most of the appeals heard by the court go through the Arizona Court of Appeals , except for death penalty cases, over which the Arizona Supreme Court has sole appellate jurisdiction . The court also has original jurisdiction in

400-609: Was therefore not considered a practicing attorney. While the state constitution establishes the office of Attorney General, it does not prescribe the powers of the office. Instead, the Arizona Constitution expressly provides that the powers and duties of the state attorney general are to be prescribed by the Arizona State Legislature . In pursuance of this constitutional mandate, the Arizona Legislature has prescribed that, under A.R.S. §41-193(A)(1) – § 41-193(A)(8),

#612387