Election Law - Circuit Court Judges - Nonpartisan Elections
Summary
HB44 would change the way Maryland circuit court judges are nominated and elected by making those elections explicitly nonpartisan. The bill removes circuit court judges from the Election Law provisions that currently treat judicial offices differently and creates a new subtitle governing circuit court judge elections. Under the bill, candidates would file and appear on the ballot without party designation, and any registered voter in the county could vote in the primary used to nominate candidates, regardless of party affiliation.
The bill establishes a two-step election process for circuit court judges. In years when one or more judges are to be elected, candidates would be nominated at the primary election, with the top vote-getters equal to twice the number of available seats advancing as nominees. In the general election, voters could vote for as many nominees as there are seats, and the highest vote-getters equal to the number of offices would be elected. The bill also sets rules for vacancies, deaths, disqualifications, ties, and ballot handling if a candidate or nominee becomes unavailable before or after ballots are printed.
Impact
HB44 would amend several sections of the Maryland Election Law and add a new Subtitle 9 governing circuit court judges. It would remove circuit court judicial races from party-based nomination rules, bar party or petition nomination for those candidates, and require nonpartisan ballot treatment. It also repeals the existing special rule that prevented a defeated circuit court judge candidate from appearing on the next general election ballot, replacing it with a broader nonpartisan framework and updated ballot-order provisions. The bill would affect candidates for circuit court judge, county election officials, and voters in counties holding these judicial elections, and it would take effect October 1, 2025.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be a structural election reform intended to depoliticize circuit court judge elections rather than a controversial policy change with fiscal or regulatory effects. The absence of recorded discussion suggests sentiment cannot be reliably characterized beyond noting that the bill was introduced and assigned to Judiciary and Ways and Means.
Contention
The main policy issue raised by HB44 is whether circuit court judges should be elected on a nonpartisan basis rather than through a system that can reflect party affiliation in the broader election code. Potential points of contention include the elimination of party labels, the use of a primary open to all registered county voters, and the replacement of existing judicial-election procedures with a new nomination and election structure. Because no hearing testimony or votes are included, no specific legislators, stakeholders, or advocacy groups can be identified as holding these positions from the provided record.