Knight v. Fontes
The Arizona Supreme Court held the retention election process for intermediate appellate judges does not violate the “free and equal” elections clause or equal privileges and immunities provision. The court affirmed dismissal of allegations that the retention elections — in which voters vote only for the appellate judges who reside in their designated geographic area — should be statewide, as the judges have statewide jurisdiction. The court interpreted the free and equal elections clause for the first time, finding it is implicated when voters are disenfranchised or their votes are given unequal weight. There is no constitutional support for a judge’s jurisdiction over a person giving him an affirmative right to vote for that judge, the court reasoned, so there is no right to vote in every court of appeals judge’s retention election. As a result, the creation of geographic districts does not disenfranchise any voter. Differences in the number of judges and populations among the geographic districts also do not violate the clauses, the court ruled, because the one-person, one-vote principle does not apply to judicial elections.
Related Commentary
State Court Oral Arguments to Watch for in April
Issues on the dockets include parental rights under now-defunct same-sex marriage bans, New York City’s emissions caps for big buildings, and more.