For many Californians, the November 3 ballot could be the only time they get to weigh in on the state’s judiciary.
Key points
- California’s constitutional requirement for judicial elections has been eroded, leaving most judges “deemed elected” without voter scrutiny.
- The November 3 ballot includes two Supreme Court justices and 13 appellate judges, but voter guides provide minimal information about them.
- Governor Newsom will have appointed over 800 judges by the end of his term, making the upcoming election potentially the last direct voter influence on many judicial seats.
- Other states offer more transparent judicial information, highlighting a gap that California reform advocates, including the League of Women Voters, seek to close.
The California Constitution has required that Supreme Court justices, appellate justices and superior court judges be elected since 1849, yet the practice has become largely symbolic as voters rarely reject or even see these candidates, according to a report by the Voice of San Francisco.
This year’s San Francisco ballot lists two Supreme Court justices—Joshua Groban and Kelli Evans—and 13 appellate judges, asking voters to confirm each for the term prescribed by law. The state‑wide voter pamphlet, which runs 175 pages, devotes only a single page to judicial nominations, offering brief biographies for the Supreme Court appointees and none for the appellate judges. Superior Court judges, who serve six‑year terms, are “deemed elected” unless an attorney files a challenge, meaning most of the 52 San Francisco Superior Court judges will not appear on the ballot.
Ballot Details and Information Gaps
Governor Gavin Newsom is on track to appoint more than 800 judges before leaving office in January, and the California Judicial Council has recently recommended adding 159 new judgeships to address backlogs. As a result, the November 3 election could be the last occasion for voters to have a direct say in the selection or retention of many judges, a point highlighted by the article.
Neither of the leading gubernatorial candidates—Democrat Xavier Becerra nor Republican Steve Hilton—has detailed how they would handle judicial appointments. Becerra, who served as attorney general from 2017 to 2021, was previously a member of the California Commission on Judicial Appointments, a body that reviews and confirms Supreme Court and appellate justices, though the commission’s hearings have historically been brief and offer limited insight into a nominee’s philosophy.
Governor’s Appointment Power
The appointment process involves regional panels of judges, attorney‑association input, and a State Bar committee that includes community representatives. However, much of the information reviewed by these panels is not publicly available, leaving voters without meaningful data to guide retention votes. A League of Women Voters representative testified in a 2025 state Assembly hearing that “voters have no meaningful information to guide their decisions” and that judicial retention races are “fundamentally invisible.”
States such as Alaska and Arizona have taken steps to fill this information vacuum: Alaska’s Judicial Council surveys lawyers and jurors and publishes complaint outcomes, while Arizona’s Commission on Judicial Performance Review provides detailed candidate profiles. The Voice of San Francisco argues that without similar reforms, California voters remain unable to fulfill their constitutional right to an informed vote on judges.
Reader questions
Which judges are on the November 3 ballot in California?
The ballot lists two California Supreme Court justices—Joshua Groban and Kelli Evans—and 13 appellate court justices. Superior Court judges are generally not on the ballot unless a specific vacancy triggers an election, as happened earlier this year in San Francisco.
How are most California judges appointed if they are not elected by voters?
When a vacancy occurs, the governor appoints a replacement after receiving recommendations from regional panels of judges and attorney associations, and a State Bar committee evaluates the nominee’s questionnaire. The appointment is then confirmed by the California Commission on Judicial Appointments, but much of the deliberation is not publicly disclosed.
Source: thevoicesf.org