Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Judicial Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill to subject Judicial Nominating Commission interviews to open-meeting rules
Summary
Representative LePak's bill to require the Judicial Nominating Commission to operate under the state's open-meeting statutes passed committee on a 13-5 vote after lengthy debate about transparency and the risk of politicizing judicial selection.
A House committee voted 13-5 to advance a bill that would subject Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC) meetings to the state's open-meeting statutes, a step proponents said would increase transparency and opponents warned could politicize judicial selection.
Representative Justin LePak, the bill sponsor, told the committee the JNC currently interviews applicants behind closed doors and then forwards three nominees to the governor without public scrutiny. "No point during the process is there any kind of public scrutiny or vetting into the process and this bill would resolve that situation," LePak said.
Supporters urged public accountability for a taxpayer-funded process that produces life-tenured judges at the appellate level. "This just offers transparency. This is a tax funded government entity. I believe it would restore public trust," Representative Wooley said during debate.
Opponents warned that subjecting interviews to public view could chill candid answers, expose applicants and interviewers to political pressure, and replace deliberation with a focus on public opinion. "In the judiciary, they're not really beholden to popular opinion as much as their adherence to the law," Representative Strom said. Strom and others said the JNC’s ability to vet legal qualifications free of immediate public pressure is important to preserve judicial independence.
LePak said openness would let the public see how the JNC evaluates candidates and might improve the quality of selection. He also said the JNC’s own rules had previously been unavailable until recent legislation required their publication.
Committee members asked whether the open-meetings framework would allow executive sessions for sensitive personnel or legal matters. LePak acknowledged the open-meetings law permits executive sessions under certain circumstances but said the record would show whether the JNC relied on closed-door sessions.
After several rounds of debate, the committee adopted a "do pass" motion. The clerk announced the vote as 13 yes and 5 no, and the bill was reported as due passed and moved on to the House floor.
