AN ACT Relating to requiring senate confirmation of gubernatorial appointments to vacancies on the supreme court;
Summary
HB1928 would require Washington State Senate confirmation for gubernatorial appointments made to fill vacancies on the state Supreme Court. Under the bill, if a vacancy occurs on the Supreme Court, the governor would appoint a replacement subject to Senate confirmation. If the appointment is made during a regular legislative session, the Senate must vote before adjournment; if made when the Legislature is not in session or during a special session, the confirmation vote must occur at the earlier of a special session called for that purpose or the next regular session.
The bill also requires a two-thirds affirmative vote of all elected senators to confirm the appointee. A confirmed appointee would serve until the next general election and qualification of a justice elected to fill the vacancy, with the elected justice serving the remainder of the unexpired term. If the Senate rejects an appointee, that person may not be reappointed to the same office for at least two calendar years. The bill further states that, except for certain judicial vacancies, other gubernatorial appointees subject to Senate confirmation generally continue serving unless rejected, and a rejected appointee may not be reappointed to the same position for one year.
The bill includes a contingent effective date tied to approval of a related constitutional amendment. It would take effect only if the proposed amendment to Article IV, section 5 of the Washington Constitution authorizing Senate confirmation of gubernatorial appointments to Supreme Court vacancies is approved by voters at the next general election; otherwise, the act is void in its entirety. In practical terms, the bill would change the appointment-and-confirmation process for filling Supreme Court vacancies and add a legislative check on the governor’s selection power.
Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, the overall sentiment cannot be measured from debate or roll call history. The bill’s text suggests a structural, process-focused reform rather than a policy dispute over substantive law. The main point of contention implied by the measure is institutional power: it shifts some authority over Supreme Court vacancy appointments from the governor to the Senate, and it imposes a supermajority confirmation threshold, which could be viewed as either a stronger accountability safeguard or a constraint on executive appointment power.
Impact
HB1928 would amend Washington statutes governing Supreme Court vacancy appointments and related confirmation procedures by adding mandatory Senate confirmation, a two-thirds vote requirement, timing rules for confirmation votes, and reappointment restrictions after rejection. It would also condition the statutory changes on voter approval of a companion constitutional amendment, meaning the bill would have no effect unless that amendment is ratified.
Sentiment
No committee discussion or vote record is provided, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from legislative debate. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be a procedural governance reform with a likely split between those favoring legislative oversight of judicial appointments and those favoring gubernatorial appointment authority.
Contention
The central contention is separation of powers and control over judicial appointments. Supporters would likely favor Senate confirmation as a check on the governor and a way to increase accountability in filling Supreme Court vacancies. Opponents would likely object to the added legislative hurdle, especially the two-thirds confirmation requirement, because it could politicize judicial vacancy appointments or delay filling vacancies. The contingent effective date also makes the bill dependent on voter approval of a constitutional amendment, which adds another layer of uncertainty and potential controversy.