The chief justice of the Arizona Supreme Court is not recusing herself from a controversial case that could change how judicial power works in the swing state.
This week, the state Supreme Court will decide on a legal challenge to Proposition 137, a Republican-backed ballot measure that would allow most judges to serve indefinitely, unless they do something bad.
Under the current "retention" system, judges must be elected again by voters when their term expires. Judges for the Supreme Court are appointed by the governor.
Proposition 137 would raise the bar for retention, allowing voters to unseat sitting judges only if they are convicted of a felony, declare bankruptcy or fail to meet judicial standards.
The controversy is part of a broader national battle on judicial power and abortion. The two Arizona Supreme Court justices facing retention this year, Clint Bolick and Kathyrn King, voted to uphold an 1864 abortion ban.
Democrats want to channel abortion backlash to unseat Bolick and King, whose replacements would be handpicked by Democratic governor Katie Hobbs, an abortion supporter.
But the results of the retention races would be nullified if voters approve Proposition 137, which applies retroactively to October 31.
Bolick and King are the only justices on the bench to recuse themselves from the case.
Progress Arizona, a leftist group, sued to keep the amendment off the ballot. The Supreme Court will decide the controversy this week after the lawsuit was rejected by a lower court.
Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer told a local outlet that she can weigh the retention case without a conflict. Any benefit that she stands to gain from Proposition 137 is "speculative" because she is not facing retention this year.
“It may not even occur that I stand for retention,” she told Capitol Media Services. “I think that is too attenuated in my mind to make for a conflict of interest.”
The state Supreme Court has seven justices who serve six-year terms. All seven sitting justices were appointed by Republican governors.
The new retention rules would allow judges to serve indefinitely "during good behavior," which is the same standard used by the U.S. Supreme Court.
President Biden has pushed for sweeping reforms, including term limits, to weaken the Supreme Court's conservative majority. Democrats have blasted the court's conservatives as extreme and out of touch, citing controversial rulings such as the decision to repeal Roe v. Wade.
