The state Senate refused today to choose between competing constitutional amendments on how Tennessee names appellate judges. If state senators continue on this path they may push a final decision off for another year.
It’s possible that both proposed state Constitutional amendments will pass this year, meaning next year’s General Assembly will have to choose which plan goes before voters in 2014.
One is closest to the governor’s proposal — to make constitutional the current system of selecting judges. The other is based on the federal appoint-and-confirm system.
While senators held off making a decision, a House committee looked at yet a third method – direct election of judges. It’s a long-time favorite of conservative groups. But the House Judiciary committee turned thumbs down on that proposal on a tie vote, 7 to 7.
WEB EXTRA:
It’s a three-day ceremony for each chamber to approve a proposed constitutional amendment. The Senate is rushing to meet printing deadlines and their own projected adjournment date.
SJR 183 Norris is the measure that could end up looking a lot like the current system.
SJR 710 Kelsey is a proposal to establish a system where the governor appoints and the legislature confirms. The current version is worded in this amendment (PDF) adopted on the first day the measure was read in the Senate.
In the afternoon, the House Judiciary Committee failed to pass a proposal by Franklin Republican Glen Casada, HB 173 Casada/SB 127 Campfield
which calls for direct, contested elections of all judge up through Supreme Court justices.
Casada filed the bill a year before Gov. Bill Haslam came out with a proposal to write the Tennessee Plan of appointing judges, with later retention elections, into the state Constitution.
Casada kept his bill alive in spite of the governor’s stance.
On Air - 90.3 WPLN-FM