Each November 4th Arizona voters have the unique opportunity to evaluate and select the judges in their county as one of only 13 states that subject judges to a public vote to retain their bench positions. In Arizona, we have a tri-partite system of merit based selection, Judicial Performance Review and retention elections that remove the necessity of raising campaign money and reduce partisan politics while ensuring that judges keep their skills honed and temperaments balanced through intense scrutiny from the public and their peers.
In a retention election, the incumbent judges do not have opponents. Rather, voters decide whether to retain a judge in office. A judge remains in the position by a simple majority of approval votes.
The only problem with retention elections is that while in smaller counties voters are more likely to first hand experience with their local Superior Court judges, in Pima and Maricopa, short of a scandal, voters usually do not. Fortunately, in 1992 the Arizona Constitution was amended to add a mandatory system of judicial performance review. The results of these reviews are made public for the voters to use in the retention election.
The Arizona Commission on Judicial Performance Review sets the standard for performance for judges and decides whether or nor judges meet those standards.
The Commission accomplishes this by first distributing surveys to attorneys, jurors, litigants/witnesses/Pro Per, court staff and other judges who have first hand knowledge of each judge. These surveys ask the respondents to rate the judge on a four to zero scale on the categories of legal ability, integrity, communication skills, judicial temperament, administrative performance and administrative skills. The Commission also holds public hearings every election year and accepts written comments about the performance of a judge from the public at any time.
The Commission then uses the collected surveys and public comments to determine if the judge “Meets” or “Does Not Meet” judicial performance standard. The standards for performance currently state that judges should:
-
administer justice fairly, ethically, uniformly, promptly and efficiently;
-
be free of personal bias when making decisions and decide cases based on the proper application of law;
-
issue prompt rulings that can be understood and make decisions that demonstrate competent legal analysis;
-
act with dignity, courtesy and patience;
-
and effectively manage their courtrooms and the administrative responsibilities of their office
After the Public Voting Meeting, the Commission publicizes its findings through the Secretary of State Voter Information Pamphlet and on the Commission’s website.
The Commission is composed of 18 members of the public, six attorneys and six judges. The current membership includes active or retired educators, engineers, psychologists, accountants, business executives and community volunteers. Any one can apply to be a member of the Commission by submitting an application, resume and letter of interest.