clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 1069   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

[Nov. 20] DEBATES 1069

vestigation, and I feel certain that any
commission would poll each of these judges
before making a selection. At the same
time, it strikes me that perhaps a judge
may be sitting on a commission selecting
the person who will be sitting next to him,
or close by in the same circuit and he
could be very embarrassed, or perhaps
there could be some animosity betwean the
newly appointed judge and the one that was
on the commission, because the sitting
judge did not pick him in the first place.

I feel that the judges in the particular
circuit or in the district where the at-
torneys are practicing would in fact re-
view the work, as suggested by Delegate
Smith, but I believe that the judge should
be taken off the spot by not being on the
commission.

I would, therefore, support this proposal
and any proposal to keep any judge off the
nominating commission.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd.

DELEGATE MUDD: Mr. Chairman, I
yield three minutes to Delegate Marion.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Marion.

DELEGATE MARION: Mr. Chairman,
ladies and gentlemen, the evidence which
we heard in our Committee was to the
effect that a system such as this with a
judge as the odd member of the nomi-
nating commission works.

There is no reason to assume that if it
works elsewhere, it is not going to work
here. There are many instances at bar as-
sociations, on the rules committee and else-
where where judges serve with lawyers,
and there is no reason to assume that here
the judge is going to dominate more than
we would expect him to dominate in these
other instances.

I think it is important to get a third
perspective in connection with the selection
of the names which will be submitted as
nominees. A layman can bring one per-
spective, and it is a valuable perspective;
a lawyer can bring another perspective and
I submit to you that a judge can bring
still a third perspective on those potential
nominees who are being considered by the
commission.

For that reason, I urge that this Com-
mittee of the Whole support the Committee
on Judicial Branch in its recommendation
that there be a single judge on a com-
mission where he will be outvoted by
lawyers and laymen.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Johnson.

DELEGATE JOHNSON: Mr. Chairman,
I yield two minutes to Delegate Schloeder.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Schloeder.

DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Mr. Chair-
man, it seems to me that for three days we
have been discussing a judicial article that
would to a very great degree insulate the
judiciary.

I gather from my conversations with
supporters of the Committee's report that
what we are trying to do is bring greater
respect to the judiciary.

It seems to me that what we are doing
here in this aspect of the majority report
is just the opposite of that. We are bring-
ing the bench down from the bench and
into the arena that we have worked so very
hard for three days to keap him out of.

As far as there being a third group of
individuals, it seems also very clear to me
that any commission could call before it
any number of judges to testify, to advise
in any way that they wanted.

It would seem to me that this is incon-
sistent with what we have been attempting
to do for these thrae days as far as the
judiciary is concerned, and for that reason,
I would respectfully ask you to support
this minority amendment at this time.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd.

DELEGATE MUDD: Mr. Chairman and
ladies and gentlemen of the Committee of
the Whole: May I say just this, which I
omitted to say initially, that this proposal
is not unprecedented. Three states which
have recently adopted the plan, for which
we are now here asking have provided that
a judge not only be a member of the nomi-
nating commission, but that he serve as
chairman of such a commission, and in an-
other state, Colorado, a judge is the ex
oflficio member of the commission.

I would like to reserve the rest of our
controlled time for the other section.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Johnson.

DELEGATE JOHNSON: Mr. Chairman,
I yield three minutes to Delegate Bam-
berger.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bamberger.

DELEGATE BAMBERGER: At least
for the moment I would like to join Gen-
eral Custer and the troops and leave the
Indians, but I would like to be understood
that I would like to be excused before we
get to the final chapter.

 

 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 1069   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  August 02, 2018
Maryland State Archives