Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 11 - Florida and South Dakota

  • from Part III - Unsuccessful Change Efforts
  • Herbert M. Kritzer
  • Book:
    Judicial Selection in the States
    Published online:
    06 April 2020
    Print publication:
    30 April 2020, pp 241-266

  • Summary

    The voters in both Florida and South Dakota approved the adoption of a Missouri Plan system for appellate courts, Florida in the 1970s and South Dakota in 1980. Voters in both states later rejected extending the system to trial courts. The adoption of the Missouri Plan for Florida’s appellate courts in 1976 came in the wake of a series of scandals involving the justices of the Florida Supreme Court. Two years later and then again 22 years later, Florida’s Constitution Revision Commission put the question of whether to extend the Missouri Plan to the trial courts before the voters, who then rejected the proposed change. The impetus for change in selection/retention of South Dakota’s Supreme Court justices appears to have come largely from the state bar. In 1980, the voters approved a Missouri Plan system for the South Dakota Supreme Court and did not divide along party lines. In the early 2000s, a proposal to extend the system to the trial courts was presented to the voters, who rejected the proposal.