Unlike some states, Arizonans vote to seat Supreme Court justices after they have been appointed to the Court by the Governor. They do not have a seat for life and must run for their judgeship every four to six years. Usually most voters check YES without knowing much about them, but occasionally a judge will rule in a way that draws enough negative media scrutiny that causes him or her to be defeated in the next election.
Arizona has always had a cringey relationship with judges and the public. When the Territory’s first State Constitution was submitted to President Taft in 1911, the document included a provision that allowed citizens to recall judges. Taft, a former judge and future Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, did not like that possibility and sent the Constitution back to Phoenix for revision. The Territorial Legislature promptly removed the provision that allowed the public to purge judges, sent it to Washington, and Arizona became a state in 1912.
After Statehood was declared, the new Arizona Legislature re-inserted the language that requires judges to stand for election. Take that, Washington!
So, of the seven members on the Arizona Supreme Court, it turns out that two of the four justices who voted to send the state back to 1864, effectively banning abortions statewide, are on the ballot in November. To no one’s surprise, reproductive rights advocates are targeting both justices for removal. In addition to a November referendum that asks voters to approve an amendment to the Arizona Constitution protecting abortion rights, the ballot will also provide voters an opportunity to reject two of the most rightwing doofuses on the bench: Associated Judges Clint Bolick and Kathryn King.
Longtime Arizonans will know Bolick, who is married to Republican Legislator Shawnna Bolick. When he was appointed to the Supreme Court by Gov. Ducey in 2016, Bolick had no judicial experience. Most importantly for Ducey and other pro-business, anti-environment Republicans, Bolick had been a vice president at the Goldwater Institute, a conservative think tank that spends its considerable budget dismantling government regulations, greasing the skids for corporations and the one percent.
It’s likely the abortion rights activists’ attempt to remove Bolick and King will succeed, if the enthusiasm shown for the Constitutional amendment is any indication. About 384,000 signatures are needed to add the referendum to the November ballot, and organizers have already collected more than 500,000, with a goal of 800,000. People are pissed.
Knowing that Bolick and King are probably toast, Republicans Legislators are now floating a resolution that would deny voters the right to remove terrible judges:
A resolution awaiting approval from the state House could keep Arizona’s Supreme Court justices on the bench, even if voters decide to reject them on the ballot in November.
That’s all they have—tricks, chicanery, lies, barriers. They can’t debate “abortion rights” or “women’s health” because they’ll lose and they know it. So they’ll attempt to muddy the November ballot with competing referenda, they’ll try to keep the Constitutional amendment off the ballot by claiming the petitions are the wrong size or people signed outside the lines, and they’ll try to keep rightwing voices on the Supreme Court by denying voters a right that’s been in the State Constitution since 1912, in spite of President Taft.
The GOP bill passed the Arizona Senate with all Republicans voting for it and all Democrats opposed. If it passes the House, the referendum will be on the November ballot—essentially asking voters if they want to give up another right. I don’t think so!