Rules committee recommends Senate Bill 1509 on juror peremptory challenges but warns of separation‑of‑powers risk

The Arizona Senate Rules Committee recommended Senate Bill 1509 as constitutional and in proper form while committee counsel warned the bill could raise separation‑of‑powers questions with the courts.

Tim Fleming, rules attorney, told members that the strike‑everything amendment to SB1509 deals with jurors and peremptory challenges. He said the measure raises distribution‑of‑powers questions under Article 3 of the Arizona Constitution because the Arizona Supreme Court recently amended court rules removing the availability of peremptory challenges in civil and criminal trials.

Fleming noted that an older Arizona case, Thompson (1949), has been read to support the legislature’s authority to regulate peremptory challenges as substantive rights, but he said subsequent decisions by the United States Supreme Court and the Arizona Supreme Court have treated peremptory challenges as more procedural. “Our sense is that, given the more recent case development, that a court, if there was a challenge, a court could find a separation of powers issue,” Fleming said. He advised that, for that reason, the bill could be vulnerable to constitutional challenge even though the committee ultimately recommended it as in proper form.

After brief discussion, the committee took a roll call and recorded five ayes and three nays: Representative Carbone (Aye); Representative Contreras (Nay); Representative Delos Santos (Nay); Representative Mathis (Nay); Speaker Montenegro (Aye); Representative Willoughby (Aye); Vice Chairman Carter (Aye); Chairman Hendricks (Aye). The committee’s action was entered as a recommendation that SB1509 is constitutional and in proper form.

The committee record separates staff legal advice from judicial determinations: counsel identified a plausible separation‑of‑powers vulnerability but did not state that a court would necessarily invalidate the measure.