Connecticut Senate Bill SJ00007

Connecticut 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/12/23
• Refer: 1/12/23
• Refer: 3/3/23
• Report Pass: 3/27/23
• Refer: 4/10/23
• Report Pass: 4/17/23

Caption

Resolution Proposing A State Constitutional Amendment To Provide For Judicial Review Of Contested General Assembly Elections.

Impact

Should this amendment be approved, it would fundamentally alter the responsibilities of the judicial branch concerning election matters. Currently, each house of the General Assembly is the final judge of the election returns and qualifications of its members. The proposed change would transfer this authority to the judicial system, potentially streamlining the resolution of election disputes and making the process more impartial by involving the courts. This law could set a significant precedent for how future electoral issues are handled in the state, emphasizing the role of judiciary in overseeing elections.

Summary

SJ00007 is a proposed resolution designed to amend the state's constitution to allow for judicial review of contested elections for the General Assembly. This amendment aims to clarify the process for addressing disputes concerning election results and ensures that the judicial department has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate these issues. By formalizing this procedure, the resolution seeks to enhance the integrity and transparency of the electoral process within the state's legislative framework.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SJ00007 appears to be largely favorable among lawmakers, as evidenced by its passage through committee with a vote tally of 17 in favor to just 1 against. Supporters highlight the importance of having a clear and fair process for contested elections, suggesting that judicial review could help maintain public trust in the democratic process. However, there may be concerns among opponents regarding the implications of centralizing election dispute authority within the courts, such as the potential for prolonged legal battles and the influence of judicial perspectives on electoral outcomes.

Contention

While the bill has garnered support, some contention may arise over the implications of redefining the election adjudication process. Critics might express worry that granting exclusive jurisdiction to the judicial department could lead to inappropriate interference in electoral matters, disrupting the balance of power between legislative and judicial branches. Additionally, concerns about the practicality and efficiency of judicial proceedings in resolving election disputes are likely to be raised during further discussions.