Select a State:

State of Nevada

History of Reform Efforts: Nevada

Unsuccessful Reform Efforts

1972
Voters rejected a proposed constitutional amendment calling for merit selection and retention of judges.

1988
Voters rejected a proposed constitutional amendment calling for merit selection and retention of judges.

1992
Voters rejected a proposed constitutional amendment that would have provided for the selection of the chief justice by the court's members. The chief justice would have served a four-year term.

1995
AJR27 was rejected by the assembly. The proposed constitutional amendment called for judicial appointments and subsequent retention elections. The proposal was initiated by the Rose Commission, chaired by Chief Justice Bob Rose.

1996
Voters rejected by a 70-30 margin a constitutional amendment proposed by initiative that would have imposed term limits on Nevada judges. Under the proposal, judges could not be elected to the same court more than twice, or more than once if the judge had previously served on that court. Voters had approved the proposed amendment by the same 70-30 margin in 1994, but in the intervening two years, lawyers, judges, and concerned citizens mobilized to conduct a public education campaign in opposition to the measure. (Constitutional amendments proposed by initiative must be approved by voters in two consecutive general elections.)

1999
AJR18 would have amended the constitution to require staggered terms of office for district court judges. The measure passed the assembly but died in the senate.

2002
Voters rejected a proposed constitutional amendment that would have required judges appointed to fill interim vacancies to serve at least one year before standing for election, unless the term expired within that year.

2010
Voters rejected by 58-42 margin a proposed constitutional amendment calling for merit selection, retention elections (with 55% voter approval required), and judicial performance evaluation.