Judicial term limits clear the full House.

With one vote to spare, the Florida House has approved a proposed constitutional amendment to set term limits for the state's appellate judiciary, and Senate President Joe Negron announced the amendment will be taken up in the upper chamber's Judiciary Committee.

The March 29 debate in the House followed the arguments that had been made in committees as the proposed amendment moved through the legislative process. Supporters said it would impose accountability on district court of appeal judges and Supreme Court justices and set service limits similar to those that already apply to the executive and legislative branches, while opponents said it was an attack on the independence of the judiciary and would add time and expense to litigation.

HJR 1 passed 73-46, or one more vote than the 60 percent required to send a constitutional amendment to voters. It was also a near party-line vote as six Republicans joined Democrats in casting the no votes.

Speaking at a press availability shortly after the House action, Negron said the issue would be heard in committee, although he voiced some reservations.

"Some senators have raised concerns that it may inadvertently create a situation where you would have appellate court judges having in the back of their minds that eventually they will need to get back into private practice, and I think we obviously want all of our judges at all levels of the courts focused entirely on the work before her or before him," Negron said.

Asked if he personally supported the measure, Negron said, "I'm going to let it move through the Senate process first -through our committees--and see what the final form is and then I'll decide."

The amendment had not been placed on the Senate Judiciary Committee's agenda--its first committee stop--as this Bar News went to press. If the amendment does pass the Legislature, it would go to voters on the November 2018 general election ballot.

The House bill limits DCA judges and Supreme Court justices to two appearances on the merit retention ballot. The Senate version limits DCA judges to three merit retention elections and Supreme Court justices to two, sets a minimum age for both courts of 50, and also requires that Supreme Court justices have served a year as a judge before their appointment. The Senate versions would apply to sitting judges and justices. The House measure applies prospectively.

Rep. Sean Shaw, D-Tampa, said the reduction in experience on the appellate bench would lead...