Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sb15 Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Judiciary approves amendment restoring 'misdemeanors' in SB 15 after heated debate on accountability
Summary
Senate Judiciary approved an amendment to SB 15 that reinserted 'misdemeanors' into the statute and then passed the bill out of committee 6–3 after members debated whether statutory accountability for legislators would conflict with constitutional rules. The committee sought further legal research on definitional issues.
Senate Bill 15 advanced out of the Senate Judiciary Committee after members debated several amendments addressing how elected officials and judges should be held accountable. The committee rejected an initial amendment proposed by Senator Olson that would have broadened accountability language; members raised constitutional concerns about overlapping rules and whether statutes could alter internal legislative expulsion procedures.
Senator Smith said she supported the concept of equal accountability but warned that vague terms could be used to target judicial decisions the legislature dislikes. "I support this amendment. I think if, as legislators, we are engaged in any of this behavior that we too should be held to account," she said during committee discussion. Miss Burkhart, the committee counsel, explained the amendment would change the type of liability but noted she had not researched whether courts have resolved the precedence between expulsion rules and statute.
Senator Manzella later moved amendment SB15.001.002, which "simply adds misdemeanors back into the language, which was originally in the statute." The amendment passed on roll call and the bill, as amended, passed out of committee 6–3.
Why it matters: SB 15 addresses causes and grounds for accountability tied to judicial office and—by extension through amendment proposals—legislative conduct. Legal questions remain about how statutory language interacts with legislative rules and constitutional protections; committee members asked staff to research whether courts have addressed precedence between rules and statute.
Next steps: The bill as amended will be reported to the floor; proponents and opponents indicated they may pursue further amendments during floor consideration or seek additional legal analysis.
