HB361 would increase the number of resident judges assigned to the Circuit Court for Queen Anne’s County from one to two. The bill amends Section 1-503 of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article, which lists the number of resident circuit court judges for each county in Maryland’s first seven judicial circuits, while leaving the general jurisdictional provisions in Section 1-501 unchanged.
In practical terms, the measure would create an additional resident circuit court judgeship for Queen Anne’s County beginning July 1, 2026. Because the bill changes the statutory judge-count table, it would affect the organization and staffing of the county’s circuit court and could influence how cases are assigned and managed locally. The bill does not alter the powers of the circuit courts statewide, only the number of resident judges in one county.
Impact
The bill amends Maryland’s Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article to revise the statutory allocation of resident circuit court judges in Queen Anne’s County from one to two. This would require the county’s circuit court to have an additional resident judge as of the bill’s effective date, July 1, 2026, and would update the state’s official judge-count schedule for the circuit courts. No other counties’ judge totals or the general jurisdiction of the circuit courts are changed.
Sentiment
There is no recorded committee testimony or vote history in the provided materials, so the bill’s sentiment cannot be measured from formal debate. Based on the bill text, it appears to be a straightforward local judicial administration measure rather than a controversial policy change. The introduction by local delegates suggests support from the county’s legislative delegation, but no opposition or broader legislative reaction is documented here.
Contention
The only apparent point of contention is whether Queen Anne’s County warrants an additional resident circuit court judge, which would involve considerations such as caseload, judicial efficiency, and state resource allocation. Because the bill is limited to one county, any disagreement would likely center on local need versus the cost and structural implications of adding a judgeship. No specific objections, amendments, or opposing arguments are included in the provided record.