Voters Reject GOP Push for Lifetime Judge Appointments, Hold Onto Controversial Justices

Arizonans have decisively turned down a proposal to grant lifetime appointments to state judges, rejecting Proposition 137 with a significant margin. Preliminary results indicate that approximately 79% of voters opted against the measure.

The proposed constitutional amendment aimed to change Arizona’s judicial retention process, which currently allows voters to decide whether to keep state and appellate judges in office. Judges face retention elections after their initial two-year term, with trial court judges reelected every four years, while appellate and state Supreme Court judges face retention every six years.

Named “The Judicial Accountability Act of 2024,” the initiative would have allowed judges to serve indefinitely, requiring retention bids only for serious breaches of a defined “good behavior” standard. This standard was to be reviewed by the state’s Judicial Performance Review Commission every four years, with possible triggers for reelection including felony convictions or bankruptcy filings.

If passed, the measure would have enabled lawmakers to appoint two new members to the review commission, granting them authority to investigate allegations of malfeasance among judges.

The proposal faced backlash from progressive groups, particularly in the wake of the Arizona Supreme Court’s controversial vote to revive a nearly century-and-a-half-old abortion ban. Critics suggested that the initiative was an attempt to protect Justices Clint Bolick and Kathryn King, both of whom supported the ruling and were up for retention votes in November. Although the act was introduced prior to the court’s decision, GOP lawmakers expedited its placement on the ballot afterward.

Proponents argued that the measure would simplify the voting process, reducing the number of judges voters need to research. However, concerns arose about the potential for politicization of the judiciary, especially with ongoing campaigns aimed at unseating Bolick and King.

Additionally, Sen. Shawnna Bolick, a Republican from Phoenix and wife of Justice Clint Bolick, found herself at the center of controversy for her support of the initiative. Critics noted the retroactive nature of the proposal, which would have allowed Bolick and King to remain in power even if voters chose to remove them.

Ultimately, Arizona voters chose not to adopt Prop. 137. Retention results show that 57% voted to keep Bolick, while 58% supported keeping King in office.