It's your ConCon. What do you want to do with it? Learn - Discuss - Decide

Should the Judicial Selection Commission have unreviewable power over the reappointment of judges?

Inspired by "Time for a Tune Up", by Jon M. Van Dyke, Honolulu Advertiser, May 18

Permalink Reply by Dan L. on May 19, 2008 at 5:08am: I am very uncomfortable with any government decisions which are not reviewable by either the people at large or by an elected official or body. So in my view, if we aren’t going to elect our judges, appointments and reappointments must come from the governor, the elected representative of the people.

A Judicial Selection Commission may well have a legitimate role. It could be, for example, that the governor must be guided by the Judicial Selection Committee. For example, if the Judicial Selection Committee recommended for or against reappointment and the governor disagreed, the matter could be referred to the State Senate for decision. There are other mechanisms possible, but the people’s representative(s) must always have the final decision.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Auhea on June 17, 2008 at 1:15pm: I think the people should choose; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by dekepalo on June 27, 2008 at 8:56pm: I think that the people should have have input in this process; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Marty on June 28, 2008 at 9:39pm: How does everyone feel about a system where, after judge is appointed by governor and approved by Senate, the judge would have to be approved by voters at next scheduled election and reapproved every 12 to 16 years. The vote would be either yes or no on approval.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kaunaloa on June 30, 2008 at 8:15pm: eh, i'm not too big on the "hybrid" appoint then re-elect. pick one and stick with it. having lived in juristictions where judges are elected, i prefer that; following the federal model of appoitnment at present here i can live with, if, as mentioned previously, it comes down to the executive and legislative having some sort of oversight of said appoitnments ...; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Gordon Becker on July 4, 2008 at 9:48pm: The July 3, 2008 issue of the Maui Weekly included a half page by Governor Linda Lingle on page 15 with the headline "A Con Con Would be Beneficial for the Entire State". She noted that "In 1996 Hawai'i voters cast more "yes" than "no" votes in support of a con con. However, that year the Hawai'i Supreme Court ruled that blank ballots be counted as "no" votes. Consequently, a con con hasn't been held in our state since 1978."
She also stated that Lt. Gov. Aiona is heading a committee studying the costs of a con con, that a report will be made by Aug 1 2008, and that "Residents can provide their comments to the task force at concon@hawaii.gov"; ▶ Reply to This