Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Judicial Selection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel hears SB 20 to bar retired judges from deciding constitutional claims
Summary
Senate Bill 20 would prevent retired judges from presiding over cases that raise constitutional issues; sponsor Jason Ellsworth said the change protects electoral accountability, while opponents warned it could worsen delays in underfunded courts. The hearing closed with the sponsor seeking a due pass.
Senate Bill 20, presented by Sen. Jason Ellsworth, would prohibit retired judges from hearing cases that present constitutional questions. Ellsworth told the Senate Judiciary Committee the policy is meant to keep judges who decide constitutional issues accountable to voters and to avoid perceived 'games' in judicial appointments.
Opponents voiced 'soft opposition,' saying the use of retired judges in the courts is rare and can help alleviate strain on underfunded district courts. Al Smith, representing the Montana Trial Lawyers, said retired judges have only infrequently handled constitutional cases and noted that appellate review remains available. Keaton Sunchild of Western Native Voice expressed concern that judicial resources are already strained.
An online opponent, John Marshall, used his testimony to criticize the bill suite and the majority’s agenda; the chair redirected him to stick to the bill. After discussion, Senator Ellsworth closed, reiterating that the measure is about accountability to the public and asked the committee for a due pass. The committee took a brief recess following the hearing before moving on to other agenda items.
