Voters swat away GOP bid to give judges lifetime appointments, retain controversial justices

Voters opted to keep Supreme Court Justices Clint Bolick and Kathryn King on the bench, even as they resoundingly rejected a GOP proposal to overhaul judicial appointments and retention. Photos by Gage Skidmore (modified) | Flickr and Flickr/CC BY-SA 2.0

Arizonans overwhelmingly rejected the idea of giving state judges lifetime appointments, defeating a ballot initiative that would have protected judges from going before voters by a margin of nearly four to one. 

With almost half of all ballots counted, 79% of Arizonans voted to kill Proposition 137. 

The constitutional amendment would have overhauled Arizona’s judicial retention process, under which voters get a say in whether to keep state and appellate judges in office. Currently, all judges face retention after their first two years. After that, trial court judges undergo reelection every four years while appellate and state Supreme Court judges are up for retention every six years. 

Dubbed “The Judicial Accountability Act of 2024” by the GOP legislators who sent it to voters, the measure would have rendered judicial terms indefinite instead and required retention bids only if judges violated a “good behavior” standard. That standard would have been reviewed by the state’s Judicial Performance Review Commission every four years, and some of the reasons a judge might be forced to face reelection would have included a felony conviction, conviction of a crime involving fraud or dishonesty or filing personal bankruptcy. 

Lawmakers would have been allowed to appoint two new members to the Commission and also have been given the power to force investigations of judges based on allegations that the judge was demonstrating a pattern of “malfeasance”.

The initiative drew criticism from progressive organizations after the Arizona Supreme Court voted to revive a near-total abortion ban from 1864, who accused lawmakers of trying to shield two state Supreme Court Justices Clint Bolick and Kathryn King — both of who voted in favor of reinstating the 1864 law and faced retention elections in November. While “The Judicial Accountability Act” was introduced before the high court’s bombshell ruling, the GOP majority fast-tracked it for the November ballot afterwards.

Republican lawmakers said the proposal would be helpful for voters by cutting down on the number of judges necessary to research before casting a ballot. They also defended it as a way to keep politics out of judicial retention elections, amid a progressive campaign to unseat Bolick and King. 

Sen. Shawnna Bolick, a Phoenix Republican and wife of the state Supreme Court Justice, faced controversy after she voted to support the measure that some said would benefit her husband. As written, the initiative was retroactive: If a majority of voters cast their ballots to remove Bolick and King, but Prop. 137 was approved, the duo would still remain on the bench.  

In the end, that conflict didn’t materialize. Voters elected to reject Prop. 137 and retain Bolick and King. With nearly half of all ballots cast, 57% of Arizonans chose to keep Bolick in office and 58% voted to retain King.