Judicial Standards Commission

House Bill 377 in North Carolina proposes changes to judicial discipline, allowing the state Supreme Court to censure, suspend, or remove trial judges without recommendations from the Judicial Standards Commission. The bill also grants the Chief Justice power to suspend judges without pay under specific conditions, and it faces criticism for potentially politicizing the judicial system. The Senate passed the bill along party lines, with a final vote scheduled for Wednesday.

North Carolina Senate passed House Bill 377, granting the state Supreme Court authority to discipline judges, including suspension without pay. The bill, supported by Republicans and opposed by Democrats, raises concerns about increased political influence over judicial decisions and concentration of power in the chief justice.

North Carolina Democrats introduced three constitutional amendments to reform the state's court system and protect gubernatorial powers, responding to ProPublica's findings of Republican-led efforts to reduce the governor's authority. The measures aim to prevent partisan shifts in power and increase transparency, though they are unlikely to pass in the current legislative session due to Republican majorities.

North Carolina Democratic lawmakers propose constitutional amendments to establish a code of ethics for Supreme Court justices, reform the Judicial Standards Commission, and limit the General Assembly's ability to transfer powers between Council of State members. The amendments aim to address judicial independence concerns, particularly regarding potential conflicts of interest for justices like Phil Berger Jr., linked to legislative actions under his father's leadership.