Lawmakers file 3 bills to alter judicial selection
CHEYENNE — Lawmakers are attempting to make major changes to Wyoming’s judicial selection process with three bills, filed just in time for Wednesday’s legislative deadline.
One failed to pass the two-thirds vote required for introduction of non-budget bills during a budget session, however.
The bills, largely sponsored by members of the Wyoming Freedom Caucus, offer a variety of potential alternatives to the current judicial selection process, including two constitutional amendments.
The proposed bills follow a well-publicized push from state conservatives, including the Freedom Caucus, to overhaul the judicial nominating process after a state Supreme Court decision protected abortion access last month.
Even prior to that decision, the Wyoming Freedom Caucus has criticized the judiciary online, alleging that Wyoming’s judge selection process is shaped by “political insiders” and “left-wing institutional capture.”
At first glance, it is unclear if the Legislature has a clear vision for what changes would counter this allegedly politicized judicial selection process.
One bill, House Bill 177, “Judicial nominating commission-senate confirmation,” would amend existing statute to require state Senate confirmation of appointed voting members of the Judicial Nominating Commission.
A second measure, Senate Joint Resolution 4, “Confirmation of justices and judicial nominations” proposed amending the Wyoming Constitution to adjust the composition and qualifications of the Judicial Nominating Commission, also requiring new state Supreme Court justices to be confirmed by the Senate.
This bill failed introduction on a 16-15 vote Wednesday in the Senate.
A third bill, House Joint Resolution 6, “Election of judges and justices,” proposes amending the state Constitution to completely do away with the Judicial Nominating Commission, instead leaving the selection of new judges to an election.
Merit-based selection
Currently, Wyoming selects judges through merit-based selection, also known as the Missouri Plan. A commission reviews applicants and sends a limited set of choices to the governor for a final appointment.
Seven people make up the Judicial Nominating Commission in Wyoming: three attorneys elected from within the Wyoming State Bar, three non-lawyers appointed by the governor and the Wyoming Supreme Court chief justice or his/her designee, who serves as chairperson and tie breaker.
The commission interviews candidates who express interest in a vacant position, narrowing the pool down to three individuals for the governor to choose from.
Though Wyoming’s electorate does not vote to appoint a judge, it is not without input.
“This merit-based process, however, recognizes the importance of the voters having input into the process,” according to the Wyoming Judicial Branch’s website. “So instead of partisan elections, the justices and judges stand for retention.”
Currently, Supreme Court justices stand for retention every eight years; district and chancery court judges every six, and circuit court judges every four.
Should either of the remaining two proposed bills pass into law, that system would see substantial changes.
Rearranging the commission
Filed Monday, SJ 4, “Confirmation of justices and judicial nominations,” would have ensured that the commission would be a majority of non-lawyers and non-judges, eliminating the input of the chief justice.
It would have required that the finalist selected by the governor be confirmed by the Senate and also would have introduced a range from which that finalist is selected, requiring three to five nominees, as opposed to capping nominations at three.
The bill, which was a proposed constitutional amendment, also would have increased the number of voting members of the commission from seven to nine.
Five of those voting members would not be judges or attorneys or “admitted to the practice of law.” Three would be appointed by the governor. One would be an elector of the state appointed by the president of the Senate, and one would be an elector of the state appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Two members would be members of the Wyoming State Bar who actively practice, elected by the members of the Bar. And the remaining two would be judges who are not members of the Supreme Court, elected by the active judges of all courts of the state.
The amendment also would have authorized the Legislature to define the “actual practice” of law, citing purposes of qualifications for justices of the Wyoming Supreme Court.
One of SJ 4’s sponsors, Sen. John Kolb, R-Rock Springs, said the bill was “about changing the process, making it more transparent. I’m not going to tell you that that was the perfect solution, it would be worked on.”
Kolb added that even though the bill failed introduction, it’s been clear to him that there’s notable interest in changing the current system to introduce more checks and balances.
“Legislation doesn’t happen right away, and there’s a good reason for that,” Kolb said. “You want it to be done correctly and not rushed.”
Voting on judges
Also filed Monday, HJ 6, “Election of judges and justices,” aims to completely eliminate the commission and leave the selection of new judges to the electorate.
The bill, which is also a proposed constitutional amendment, would require that judges and justices be elected.
Supreme Court justices and judges who serve statewide courts would be elected by voters statewide and district judges by voters in the counties they would serve.
The bill also removes the requirement that judges stand for retention “if they desire to seek another term in judicial office.”
In addition to Kolb, the Wyoming Tribune Eagle attempted to contact Rep. Chip Neiman, R-Hulett; Sen. Larry Hicks, R-Baggs; Sen. Cheri Steinmetz, R-Torrington; Rep. Jeremy Haroldson, R-Wheatland; Rep. Rachel Rodriguez-Williams, R-Cody; Rep. Marlene Brady, R-Green River, and Rep. Gary Brown, R-Cheyenne, for comment on the bills they sponsored. Besides Kolb, none of the lawmakers responded prior to the publication time.
This story was published on Feb. 12, 2026.