Connecticut 2016 Regular Session

Connecticut Senate Bill SB00350

Introduced
3/2/16  
Introduced
3/2/16  
Refer
3/2/16  
Report Pass
3/30/16  
Refer
4/8/16  
Refer
4/8/16  
Report Pass
4/14/16  
Report Pass
4/14/16  
Engrossed
4/19/16  
Engrossed
4/19/16  
Report Pass
4/21/16  
Chaptered
5/25/16  
Enrolled
5/26/16  
Enrolled
5/26/16  

Caption

An Act Concerning The Appointment Of Family Support Magistrates.

Impact

The new appointment system, effective January 1, 2017, allows family support magistrates to serve five-year terms instead of the previous three-year terms. The requirement for magistrates to be experienced in family law and to devote full time to their roles is also emphasized, which is expected to improve the qualifications of appointees. By streamlining the process and elevating accountability, the bill seeks to ensure a higher standard of justice for families involved in judicial proceedings related to support issues.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 350, also known as Public Act No. 16-211, addresses the structure of the Family Support Magistrate Division within the state's judicial system. The bill modifies the process of appointing family support magistrates, changing their nomination from solely by the Governor to a system that requires appointments by the General Assembly following nominations made by the Governor. This shift aims to enhance the oversight of appointments by integrating legislative input, which could lead to increased scrutiny and accountability of those serving as family support magistrates.

Sentiment

General sentiment around SB00350 appears to be pragmatic and supportive, particularly among legislators who prioritize transparency and accountability in judicial appointments. However, there may be concerns regarding the potential for political influences in the nomination process, which some stakeholders may view as a compromise to the independence of the judiciary. Overall, the sentiment leans towards improvement and reform within the system, with an emphasis on the suitability of appointees.

Contention

Some contention arises concerning the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches regarding judicial appointments. Critics may argue that increasing legislative involvement in the nomination process could lead to partisan politics overshadowing qualifications. Nonetheless, the bill's proponents argue that this new process strengthens democratic oversight and mitigates any potential biases inherent in gubernatorial appointments without legislative involvement.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB227

Governor: appointments.

CA SB487

Tobacco Education and Research Oversight Committee.

CA SB1486

Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development: small business: income tax credit: outreach program.

TX SB991

Relating to the administration of the Texas Enterprise Fund and the Texas emerging technology fund and of awards from those funds.

SC S0279

DEW Restructuring

CT SB00504

An Act Requiring Joint Campaigning By Candidates For Governor And Lieutenant Governor.

CT HB06110

An Act Requiring Joint Campaigning By Candidates For Governor And Lieutenant Governor In Primaries.

CA AB1123

State of emergency: Governor’s powers: notice of executive action: audit of emergency fund expenditures.