The proposed amendment requires Court of Appeals and Supreme Court Justices to stand for retention at the first general election after appointment, to change their stand for retention from eight years to four (Appeals) and from ten years to four (for Supreme Court) and to stand for retention no more than twice more, limiting those judges to no more than ten years in office.
This link is to a smallish PDF of the Colorado Blue Book.
Colorado has as nearly a non-partisan system for judges as can be devised in our partisan world. Upon a vacancy, an independent (NOT non-partisan) commision recommends a list of names to the governor, who appoints one. When that judge stands for retention (every four to ten years, depending on the level), another independent (again, NOT non-partisan) commision recommends to the electorate according to very well defined categories whether that judge should be retained. A judge may be retained until the mandatory retirement age of 72.
I see no reason to break a system that works.
This proposed amendment is a blatant political ploy by John Andrews, a conservative Republican, to remove all judges appointed by former Democratic Governor Roy Romer, who left office in 1998. He is, of course, dumb enough not to note that many of current Governor Bill Owens’ appointees will be forced to leave the bench during the tenure of the next, likely Democratic, governor of Colorado.
Regardless of Andrews’ lack of common sense, I am appalled by the increasing politicization of the bench. I am not so naive that I believe politics has nothing to do with the judiciary, however, I firmly believe that absent incompetence or malfeasance in office, judges should not be judged by the same standards as our legislators or executives.
The law is arcane and technical, and requires experienced and knowledgeable interpreters.
I’m against this proposed amendment, and plan to vote against it early and often.