Proposals to overhaul the state’s court system — and particularly the Florida Supreme Court–started moving through the Senate on Monday following a committee’s votes to require the upper chamber to confirm Supreme Court nominees and a proposal making it easier for the Legislature to overturn rules approved by the high court.
The action Monday in the Senate Judiciary Committee did not include discussion of the most combustible issue, a House proposal that would split the high court into two different courts. Nevertheless, it still brought criticism from Democrats and some attorneys’ groups, who suggested that some of the proposals came dangerously close to overrunning the constitutional separation of powers.
“I almost want to ask, generally: ‘What did the court do to us?'” said Sen. Oscar Braynon, D-Miami Gardens.
Before Monday, most court reform measures had been heard in the House, where Speaker Dean Cannon has made it one of his priorities.
The proposals come in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decisions last year to knock off the ballot three constitutional amendment proposed by the Legislature. The court ruled the amendments’ ballot summaries could have confused voters, a move that frustrated Cannon, R-Winter Park, and other leaders.
On a party-line, 4-2 vote Monday, the committee approved a measure that would require the Senate to confirm Supreme Court nominees. That would change current law that allows the governor to appoint justices recommended by the Judicial Nominating Commission directly to the court. Retention elections would still be required.
“Senate confirmation, in my opinion, simply adds an independent analysis of the merits and qualifications of the candidates,” said Sen. John Thrasher, R-St. Augustine.
But Steve Metz, chief legislative counsel for the Florida Bar, argued that the measure could slow down the process if the Legislature’s not in session. It could also the Senate to intentionally drag its feet on a confirmation in response to disagreements with the governor.
“You’re going to ask really good people, really good lawyers, to perhaps put their practice on hold indefinitely,” Metz said.
The committee also moved forward with a proposed committee bill that would amend the constitution to lower the standard to overturn rules of practice and procedures set by the Supreme Court. Currently, it takes a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to get rid of a rule. Following an amendment approved Monday by the committee, the new standard would be three-fifths. The court would be barred from re-enacting the rule for at least three years.
In an effort to protect the court-rule measure from being knocked off the ballot, the bill includes four ballot summaries. The first would stand unless it was struck down by the Supreme Court, in which case the second summary would be placed on the ballot. If the court struck that one, it would be replaced by the third summary and then the fourth if the court continues to strike them down.
“If they don’t like one, then they can try another one,” Flores said.
But Metz urged caution, noting that the Legislature has only overturned the rules 12 times and the Supreme Court has only tried to reinstate a rule once.
“There really has been great deference, when it comes to this area, between the branches,” he said.
The committee did not act on a pair of other court-related measures. One would increase the standards for judges to win retention elections. The other would allow the attorney general to recommend some appointees to judicial nominating commissions, taking that authority away from the Bar.
By Brandon Larrabee
The News Service of Florida
