Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections Da topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate passes bill making DA elections nonpartisan in select counties amid constitutional concerns
Summary
Lawmakers debated a rules-substitute that would move certain district attorney elections in large counties to nonpartisan ballots; supporters argued public-safety and governance rationales while opponents warned of unequal treatment of constitutional officers, equal-protection risk, and likely litigation. The Senate adopted the substitute and passed the bill.
The Senate engaged in extended debate over a rules committee substitute that would make district attorney elections nonpartisan in several specified large counties.
Supporters argued the change would promote public safety and reduce perceived politicization of prosecutorial offices in high-population jurisdictions. The sponsor said the measure was tailored to counties with larger caseloads and argued that the change improves governance and consistency in how serious criminal matters are handled.
Opponents disputed the legal basis for carving out select counties. Multiple senators warned the measure treats similarly situated constitutional officers differently, raising equal-protection concerns, and predicted protracted and costly litigation if the law were enacted. Several senators also pointed out statutory and constitutional complexities about election cycles, noting that constitutional officers are typically elected in the November general election and that statutory nonpartisan-election mechanics normally run in primary-cycle schedules.
The floor debate included sustained back-and-forth questioning about parade-of-horribles outcomes, transition timetables, and potential budgetary costs of defending lawsuits. One senator argued the bill is a partisan attempt to change electoral mechanics in specific metropolitan counties; another called for principled uniformity across all counties.
After debate, the committee substitute was adopted and the Senate passed the bill by recorded vote (34 the recorded tally on the floor was reported as 32 yeas and 21 nays on the committee substitute; the transcript records the bill as passed by substitute). Senators on both sides noted that judicial review of the statute was likely.
