Carey D. Dobson, William Ekstrom, Ted A. Schmidt and John Thomas Taylor Iii, Petitioners v. State of Arizona, Ex…

Summary

The Arizona Supreme Court accepted special-action jurisdiction and held that the petitioning commissioners had standing to challenge H.B. 2600. It held that the statute directly conflicted with Arizona's Constitution by altering the constitutionally prescribed judicial-nomination process, and that the statute's provisions were not severable. The court enjoined application of the statute and awarded reasonable attorney's fees under the private-attorney-general doctrine.