PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE VI, SECTION 3, OF THE HAWAII STATE CONSTITUTION TO INCREASE THE MANDATORY RETIREMENT AGE FOR STATE JUSTICES AND JUDGES.
Summary
HB1528 proposes a constitutional amendment to raise Hawaii’s mandatory retirement age for state justices and judges from 70 to 75. The bill amends Article VI, Section 3 of the Hawaii Constitution to replace the current retirement age with 75 years, while leaving in place the existing judicial appointment, retention, qualification, and tenure provisions for the supreme court, intermediate appellate court, circuit courts, and district courts.
The measure also specifies the ballot question that would be presented to voters if the amendment advances, asking whether the Constitution should be changed to increase the mandatory retirement age for all state court justices and judges from 70 to 75. Because this is a constitutional amendment, it would not change the retirement age by statute alone; it would require the amendment process and voter approval under the Hawaii Constitution.
Impact
If adopted, HB1528 would directly amend the Hawaii Constitution and supersede the current mandatory retirement age provision for judges and justices. The practical effect would be to allow sitting and future judicial officers to remain in office until age 75, potentially extending judicial service and affecting judicial turnover, succession timing, and vacancy frequency across Hawaii’s courts. The bill does not alter the basic appointment structure or qualifications for judges, but it would change the constitutional retirement rule that currently requires retirement at 70.
Sentiment
The available legislative history suggests generally favorable treatment of the bill, at least at the House stage. HB1528 passed second reading as amended in HD 1 and was referred onward without any recorded votes in opposition or with reservations, indicating no visible floor-level resistance in the available record. The bill’s advancement suggests the proposal was viewed as a straightforward constitutional question rather than a highly divisive measure.
Contention
The main policy issue is whether Hawaii should keep the current mandatory retirement age of 70 or extend it to 75. Supporters would likely view the change as preserving experienced judicial talent and aligning retirement rules with longer working lives, while critics may worry about reduced turnover, delayed opportunities for newer judges, or concerns about age and judicial capacity. No committee transcript is available here, so specific arguments from legislators or stakeholders are not documented in the provided record.
Same As
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE VI, SECTION 3, OF THE HAWAII STATE CONSTITUTION TO INCREASE THE MANDATORY RETIREMENT AGE FOR STATE JUSTICES AND JUDGES.
Proposing An Amendment To Article Vi, Section 3, Of The Hawaii State Constitution To Increase The Mandatory Retirement Age For State Justices And Judges.
Proposing Amendments To Article X, Section 2 And Article Xviii, Section 12, Of The Constitution Of The State Of Hawaii To Establish Local Elected School Boards.
Proposing Amendments To Article X, Section 2 And Article Xviii, Section 12, Of The Constitution Of The State Of Hawaii To Establish A School Board Comprised Of Appointed And Elected Members.