|
this mean that a judicial member of the
commission who during that period of time
might be appointed to the Court of Appeals
to fill out a vacancy would be ineligible?
THE CHAIRMAN: I take it the intent
of the Committee of the Whole would be
that there would be no judicial members of
the commission.
Delegate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: There would
be none at all at any time.
THE CHAIRMAN: That was my under-
standing. I must say that the provisions
are not entirely clear to the Chairman to
that effect. I suppose a governor could ap-
point a judge as a lay member, but cer-
tainly it was the intent of the Committee
of the Whole that there not be a judge as
an ex officio member on any nominating
commission.
Delegate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: This language
certainly would need to be clarified.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd.
DELEGATE MUDD: I did not think so,
Delegate Sherbow, in view of the fact that
we have eliminated any possibility of a
member of the judiciary being a member of
the nominating commission.
Did you advance the vote that a lawyer
member of the commission might ultimately
be appointed to the bench and then whether
this restriction would apply thereafter, I
was not quite clear on that part of the
question, was that the possibility with
which you were concerned?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd.
DELEGATE MUDD: Then I would have
to re-read that section in view of the possi-
bility of determining if there would be that
kind of restriction.
THE CHAIRMAN: Would you give
thought as soon as you can to the two
questions involved, namely, whether the
language of the previous section needs any
amendment to indicate whether or not a
member of the judiciary can be appointed
as a lay member or can be elected as a
lawyer member and secondly, if so, and if it
is possible for a member of the judiciary
to be appointed a member of the commis-
sion?
|
*
Would the last sentence beginning on
line 19 prevent him from being elevated
from one court to another? Would you con-
sider that and then advise the Committee?
THE CHAIRMAN: For what purpose
does Delegate E. J. Clarke rise?
DELEGATE E. CLARKE: I have a
question.
THE CHAIRMAN: Will Delegate Mudd
yield to a question?
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Clarke.
DELEGATE E. CLARKE: Does this
language prevent any member from the
state central committee from serving?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd?
DELEGATE MUDD: The language in
section 5.20?
THE CHAIRMAN: I think it was an-
swered yesterday.
DELEGATE MUDD: Would this pro-
hibit a member of the state central com-
mittee? Apparently not.
THE CHAIRMAN: Office in a political
party in line 18.
DELEGATE MUDD: I am sorry, I
missed that. It would. I so answered it in
my presentation.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Wheatley,
for what purpose do you rise?
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: For a ques-
tion.
THE CHAIRMAN: All right.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: I have a
question of the Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you yield, Dele-
gate Mudd?
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: What would
be the case if the government should ap-
point a lawyer as a lay member? Would
that be precluded, assuming he might not
be in the category established by rule?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd.
DELEGATE MUDD: Is the question
whether the government could appoint a
lawyer as a lay member?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: That is my
question.
|
