Alabama House Bill HB40

Alabama 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/23/23
• Refer: 2/23/23
• Report Pass: 4/5/23
• Engrossed: 4/25/23
• Refer: 4/25/23
• Report Pass: 5/10/23
• Enrolled: 5/24/23
• Passed: 5/24/23

Caption

Relating to retired justices and judges; to amend Sections 12-18-10 and 12-18-61, Code of Alabama 1975, to revise the compensation received by retired justices and judges who are called to active duty; to require retired justices and judges be paid per diem and mileage and be provided court-supportive personnel; to require continuing legal education annually; and to make nonsubstantive, technical revisions to update the existing code language to current style.

Impact

The bill's amendments are tailored to improve the attraction and support of retired justices and judges returning to serve, especially during peak judicial needs. By ensuring that retired judicial officers are compensated appropriately and supported with necessary resources, HB40 aims to address judicial shortages and increase the effectiveness of the legal system. This legal adjustment seeks to modernize and create incentives for retired judges to participate actively in the judiciary system again.

Summary

House Bill 40 amends Sections 12-18-10 and 12-18-61 of the Code of Alabama 1975, relating to the compensation of retired justices and judges who are called back to active duty. The bill seeks to enhance the financial provisions for retired judicial officers by mandating that they receive per diem and mileage reimbursements, along with court-supportive personnel when serving again. Additionally, it requires these judges to complete annual continuing legal education to ensure their legal knowledge remains current.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment around HB40 appears to be positive among lawmakers and judicial stakeholders, recognizing the need for flexibility and support for retired judges. The measures to compensate and provide court resources seem to be well-received as a way to bolster the judicial system. However, as with any legislation regarding compensation, there may be concerns from budget-conscious legislators regarding the potential impact on state finances and resource allocation.

Contention

Notably, the bill represents a significant shift in how retired judges may engage with the system, potentially leading to discussions about the implications of such a policy change. Questions may arise regarding the balance between incentivizing retired judges to return and the financial sustainability of these provisions. In addition, the requirement for ongoing legal education may spark debate about its feasibility and the implications for retired judges who may not wish to return to formal training.