Legislative anger of state supreme court decisions is nothing new, nor is the practice of “punishing” the judiciary as a whole for the decisions of that court. The most visible example so far this year may have been the attempt made in Arizona last week.

Arizona has an independent redistricting commission (IRC). In November 2011, the state’s Senate and Governor attempted to remove the chair of that commission. The chair filed an action in the state’s Supreme Court, which held the attempted removal unconstitutional.

Angry over the decision, a state senator attempted to “push back” against the judiciary as a branch in two ways. The first was an effort to end the state’s merit selection system and replace it with partisan elections (SB 1371 / SCR 1034).

The second would have reduced the state’s Court of Appeals (which did not hear the IRC case and had nothing to do with it) from 22 judges to 6 (SB 1372).

The video below is from the February 13, 2012 hearing on these bills before the Arizona Senate Judiciary Committee.

• Previous Entry: West Virginia bill to change funding for judicial campaign conduct committee amended to overhaul system in light of recent U.S. Supreme Court decision
• Next Entry: Maryland joins other states in considering ways to allow judicial disciplinary commission to remove judges from office for their opinions