Massachusetts
Massachusetts’ highest court is called the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The court has six justices and one chief justice. The chief justice is chosen according to the same procedures as the associate justices. (Source: Supreme Judicial Court Justices)
Judicial Selection
The governor nominates candidates to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The governor receives a list of candidates from a judicial nominating commission but is not required to select a candidate from the list. The nominee must be confirmed by a majority vote of the governor’s council, consisting of elected district representatives and the lieutenant governor. An appointed justice serves a single term until mandatory retirement at age 70. To fill an interim vacancy, the governor receives a list of candidates from the judicial nominating commission but is not required to select a candidate from the list. The nominee must be confirmed by a majority vote of the governor’s council. An appointed justice serves a single term until mandatory retirement at age 70.
State Constitution
Massachusetts’ first and only constitution was adopted in 1780. As of January 1, 2024, it had 121 amendments. (Source: John Dinan, 2024)
Filters
Paths Toward Abolishing Qualified Immunity for Violations of State Constitutional Rights
States should not adopt the federal doctrine that shields officials from liability for civil rights violations.
Three U.S. Supreme Court Cases that Transformed State Judicial Elections
Judicial elections have become major political battlegrounds — complete with dark money, special interests, and attack ads — thanks to several U.S. Supreme Court decisions.
Every State Supreme Court Justice in One Searchable Database
A new resource from the State Law Research Initiative lets users sort the nation’s high court justices by state, professional background, party affiliation, and more.
How Courts Oversee Ballot Initiatives
State courts — and to some degree federal courts — play a significant role in every stage of the direct democracy process.
Fourth Amendment Lags Behind State Search and Seizure Provisions
State courts have long provided more search and seizure protections than the U.S. Supreme Court — and they sometimes influence federal law.
Legislative Efforts to Abolish Qualified Immunity Yield Mixed Results
Colorado and New Mexico have enacted laws to hold police and other officials accountable for state constitutional violations, while other states have broadened immunities.
New Findings Highlight Lack of Diversity on State Supreme Courts
More data and further scholarship is needed to devise policies for promoting a state bench that adequately represents the varied background of the public.
The Search and Seizure Law of State Constitutions
Massachusetts is on the front lines of a movement toward independent state constitutional rights.