WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 1236

Constitutional Amendment/Judicial Standards Commission.

2025-2026 Session Introduced by Eric Ager and 24 co-sponsors

Creates a constitutionally mandated Judicial Standards Commission to oversee and publicly disclose discipline of judges, enhancing transparency and accountability.

Passed 1st Reading
#appointments;commissions;constitution #nc;courts;elections;ethics;judges;judicialstandardscomn.;magistrates;membership;public;supremecourt;chiefjustice
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 1236

Overview

HB 1236 (Session 2025, North Carolina) proposes a constitutional amendment to add the Judicial Standards Commission to the North Carolina Constitution and to reform the structure and operation of the Judicial Standards Commission (JSC) in statute. The bill aims to create a fairer, more transparent, and nonpartisan framework for investigating and disciplining judges and justices, with public disciplinary hearings and records.

Main purpose and intent

  • Establish a Constitutionally mandated Judicial Standards Commission to oversee complaints and disciplinary actions involving judges and justices.
  • Increase transparency and public accountability in the conduct and discipline process for members of the General Court of Justice.
  • Align the JSC’s statutory framework with the constitutional amendment to ensure consistency and public trust.

Key provisions

Constitutional amendment (Sec. 1)

  • Creates a new Sec. 23 in Article IV of the North Carolina Constitution establishing the Judicial Standards Commission.
  • Composition:
    • Five judges appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court: 1 Court of Appeals judge, 2 Superior Court judges, 2 District Court judges.
    • Five licensed attorneys appointed by the North Carolina State Bar.
    • Five citizens who are not lawyers or judges, appointed by the Governor.
  • Public hearings and records: Disciplinary hearings and sanctions administered by the Commission must be made public.

Referendum timing and effect (Sec. 1(b)–(d))

  • The constitutional amendment would be placed on the November 3, 2026 general election ballot for voter approval.
  • If a majority approves, the amendment becomes effective upon certification; if not approved, it has no effect.

Amending statutory framework (Sec. 2)

  • Rewrites Article 30 of Chapter 7A (Judicial Standards Commission) to:
    • Clarify purpose: Investigation and resolution of inquiries about the qualification or conduct of judges/justices; disciplinary procedures aligned with Article IV, Sec. 23; impeachment remains separate.
    • Redefine composition (existing statutory framework):
    • Two Court of Appeals judges, two Superior Court judges, two District Court judges (all appointed by the Chief Justice).
    • Four judges appointed by the General Assembly (two District Court judges, two Superior Court judges) with specific proportional nominations.
    • Four non-judicial citizens (two appointed by the Governor, two by the General Assembly per G.S. 120-121; includes alternates for scheduling and conflicts).
    • Vacancies, disability, and disqualification processes for members (including alternates) are detailed to ensure continuity.
    • Procedures and confidentiality:
    • General confidentiality of investigations and papers, with specified points where information becomes public (e.g., after formal charges and during public discipline proceedings).
    • Public hearings required for disciplinary actions; certain records and recommendations to the Supreme Court become public.
    • Clear thresholds for approving public disciplinary actions (minimum voting concurrence).
    • Provisions for respondent rights, including access to proposed records, the ability to submit objections, and the opportunity to present arguments before the Supreme Court.
    • Supreme Court involvement in final orders, with potential remand or rejection of recommendations.

Who is affected

  • Judges and justices of the General Court of Justice subject to investigation and potential discipline.
  • Members of the JSC (judges, attorneys, and citizen members) and their alternates.
  • The North Carolina State Bar (appointments of attorney members).
  • The Governor and General Assembly (appointments of citizen members and alternates).
  • Public and media, via mandated public hearings and public records related to disciplinary actions.

Procedural and timeline notes

  • Constitutional amendment would be voted on November 3, 2026.
  • If approved, the statutory changes in Sec. 2 would take effect on January 1, 2027, with the remainder of the act effective upon enactment.
  • The bill emphasizes a transition to a transparent, publicly reportable process for judicial discipline, including public hearings and public records of sanctions.

Potential impact

  • Increased transparency and public confidence in how judicial conduct is reviewed and sanctioned.
  • A broader, bicameral-influenced composition for the JSC (combining judges, attorneys, and lay members) intended to reduce partisan influence.
  • Stronger confidentiality controls during investigations, balanced with public disclosure requirements for final disciplinary actions.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.