Court-related measures come down to the wire.

As leaders of the Florida House and Senate scrambled to work out a budget, two high-profile measures affecting the court system appeared likely to die at the end of the legislative session.

A third issue, though, concerned with the time+ the Supreme Court takes to make its decisions, might be included in last minute legislation.

However, proposed constitutional amendments imposing term limits on Florida's appellate judiciary appear unlikely to pass. The term limits amendment passed the House but was never considered by a Senate committee. That made it unlikely--but still barely possible--that it would be considered on the Senate floor. An effort to remove Supreme Court oversight from judicial education also appeared to face long odds for passage. While bills passed their first two committees each in the House and Senate, they were never considered in their final committees of reference. That means each chamber would have to withdraw the bills from committee and consider them on the floor.

While that procedure is not unheard of, it would be unlikely to happen in both chambers in the hectic last days of a session when lawmakers are focused on passing and working out differences between House and Senate versions of dozens of other bills.

Much uncertainty surrounded legislation because of the lateness of agreement for the 2017-18 budget. House and Senate leaders agreed the session would be extended from its scheduled Friday, May 5, adjournment until Monday May 8, but only budget-related matters would be taken up May 8, and all other legislation would either be passed by May 5 or die. The May 5 limit for nonbudget issues was hours after this News went to press. This story will be updated online at www.FloridaBar.org/ News.

Term Limits

Opposing terms limits for any Florida judges is a top legislative priority of The Florida Bar and virtually every one of the Bar's sections and divisions also went on record against any such amendment.

The Bar closely monitored the bills and also worked with other groups that opposed the amendment.

"We're thankful that a broad coalition of business groups, attorney groups, and consumer groups expressed their concern that this would be very harmful to the independence and the quality of the judiciary, so we're glad to see that this did not pass," said Board of Governors member Gary Lesser, who chairs the Bar's Legislation Committee.

The Senate Judiciary Committee never took up its version of the amendment, SJR 482...