Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Judicial Selection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wyoming lawmakers debate judicial nominating commission, public input and retention votes
Summary
Committee members, judges and the public debated whether Wyoming should change how judges are selected and retained, including whether to add senate confirmations for Supreme Court justices and expand public transparency about applicants to the judicial nominating commission.
Members of the Joint Judiciary Committee spent substantial time on whether Wyoming should alter its merit-selection model for judges, including the judicial nominating commission (JNC), public access to applicants’ names and whether the Senate should confirm Supreme Court justices.
Chief Justice John Fox, who was at the hearing, and several judges described Wyoming’s selection system as one that emphasizes experience, professionalism and insulation from political pressure. Chief Justice Fox and other speakers explained that the JNC narrows applicants and the governor then appoints from a slate; a judge’s continued service is later subject to a retention vote in a general election. Several judges and the Court’s administrative staff asked the committee to weigh changes carefully because the current process is intended to protect judicial independence.
Some committee members and outside commenters argued for more transparency. Representative Lien and others pushed for allowing the public to know who applies for judgeships earlier in the process; Representative Lane moved to request a joint resolution to add Senate confirmation for Supreme Court justices, a motion the committee later forwarded to LSO for drafting. Members discussed concerns about politicization, the short 60-day window the JNC has to process applications and whether confirmation hearings would deter applicants. The committee recorded a split vote on a proposal to draft a joint resolution adding Senate confirmation for justices.
Justices and judges said applicants already face scrutiny from their peers: the JNC requests references and interviews candidates, and the governor’s selection period is open to public input. The judges said the public elsewhere has other transparency opportunities — published judicial opinions, retention elections, and open court proceedings — but that the committee could consider limited changes such as additional public notice or optional public vetting steps.
The committee did not adopt a statutory or constitutional change at the meeting. Members asked the court and LSO to return with more detail if the committee pursues formal changes during the interim.
