CACR 11 (2012): relating to terms for state judges. Providing that all state judges be commissioned for renewable 7-year terms.

Cite this page

Granite Record indexes the General Court’s record; it is not that record. Where a citation allows only one source, cite the General Court — every page here links to what it is drawn from. The date below is the day the page was read.

MLA
“CACR 11 (2012): relating to terms for state judges. Providing that all state judges be commissioned for renewable 7-year terms.” Granite Record, https://graniterecord.org/bill/2012/cacr11. Accessed 24 Oct. 2026.
APA
Granite Record. (n.d.). CACR 11 (2012): relating to terms for state judges. Providing that all state judges be commissioned for renewable 7-year terms. Retrieved 24 Oct. 2026, from https://graniterecord.org/bill/2012/cacr11
Chicago
Granite Record. “CACR 11 (2012): relating to terms for state judges. Providing that all state judges be commissioned for renewable 7-year terms.” Accessed 24 Oct. 2026. https://graniterecord.org/bill/2012/cacr11.
BibTeX
@misc{bill-2012-cacr11, title = {CACR 11 (2012): relating to terms for state judges. Providing that all state judges be commissioned for renewable 7-year terms.}, howpublished = {Granite Record}, url = {https://graniterecord.org/bill/2012/cacr11}, note = {Accessed 24 Oct. 2026} }

CACR 11 (2012)

relating to terms for state judges. Providing that all state judges be commissioned for renewable 7-year terms.

  • Status: Failed to pass
  • Term: 2011-2012
  • House committee: Constitutional Review and Statutory Recodification
  • Subject: Constitutional Amendments

The Story

It was introduced on January 6, 2011 and referred to the House Judiciary committee. The committee held a public hearing on February 22, 2011. The committee met in executive session on March 1, 2011 to vote on its recommendation. The committee retained the bill, holding it for further work rather than reporting it out this year. The committee held a work session on October 4, 2011. The committee met in executive session on October 25, 2011 to vote on its recommendation. The committee voted 10–6 to recommend that the House kill it, and the report was placed on the regular calendar. On January 5, 2012 the House rejected a motion to kill it on a roll call 151–160. On January 5, 2012 the House adopted “Recommit (Rep Giuda)” on a roll call 207–102. The House withdrew that referral and sent the bill to the Constitutional Review and Statutory Recodification committee instead. The committee held a public hearing on February 14, 2012. The committee met in executive session on February 21, 2012 and February 23, 2012. The majority recommended that the House pass it with changes (amendment 0951h), and the minority recommended that the House kill it, by a vote of 10–5. The report was placed on the regular calendar. The committee's amendment (0951h) was adopted on a voice vote on March 7, 2012, changing the text of the bill. On March 7, 2012 the House rejected a motion to pass it with changes on a roll call 218–120. On March 7, 2012 the House adopted “Lay On The Table (Rep Bettencourt)” on a division vote 244–97. On March 21, 2012 the House adopted “Remove From Table (Rep Itse)” on a division vote 209–144. On March 21, 2012 the House rejected a motion to kill it on a division vote 156–200. On March 21, 2012 the House failed “Reconsider Ought to Pass (Rep B.Murphy)” on a division vote 172–176.

Sponsors

Hearings and Sessions

  • February 22, 2011, 1:00 PM: public hearing, House Judiciary, LOB 208
  • March 1, 2011, 1:00 PM: executive session, House Judiciary, LOB 208
  • October 4, 2011, 11:00 AM: subcommittee work session, House Judiciary, LOB 208
  • October 25, 2011, 11:00 AM: executive session, House Judiciary, LOB 208
  • February 14, 2012, 11:00 AM: public hearing, House Judiciary, LOB 206
  • February 21, 2012, 10:30 AM: executive session, House Judiciary, LOB 206
  • February 23, 2012, 10:00 AM: executive session, House Judiciary, LOB 301

Votes

  • January 5, 2012, House: Inexpedient to Legislate — yeas 151, nays 160, failed
  • January 5, 2012, House: RECOMMIT TO JUDICIARY (REP GIUDA) — yeas 207, nays 102, passed
  • March 7, 2012, House: OTP/AM 0951H(NT) — yeas 218, nays 120, failed
  • March 7, 2012, House: Lay On The Table (Rep Bettencourt) — yeas 244, nays 97, passed
  • March 21, 2012, House: Remove From Table (Rep Itse) — yeas 209, nays 144, passed
  • March 21, 2012, House: Inexpedient to Legislate — yeas 156, nays 200, failed
  • March 21, 2012, House: Reconsider Ought to Pass (Rep B.Murphy) — yeas 172, nays 176, failed

The Docket

  • January 6, 2011: Introduced 1/6/2011 and Referred to Judiciary
  • February 22, 2011: Public Hearing: 2/22/2011 1:00 PM LOB 208
  • March 1, 2011: Executive Session: 3/1/2011 1:00 PM LOB 208
  • March 1, 2011: Retained in Committee
  • October 4, 2011: Retained Bill - Subcommittee Work Session: 10/4/2011 11:00 AM LOB 208
  • October 25, 2011: Retained Bill - Executive Session: 10/25/2011 11:00 AM LOB 208
  • November 2, 2011: Committee Report: Inexpedient to Legislate for Jan 4 (Vote 10-6; RC)
  • January 5, 2012: Inexpedient to Legislate: MF RC 151-160
  • January 5, 2012: Recommit (Rep Giuda): MA RC 207-102
  • January 11, 2012: Vacated from Judiciary and Referred to Constitutional Review and Statutory Recodification
  • February 14, 2012: Public Hearing: 2/14/2012 11:00 AM LOB 206
  • February 21, 2012: Executive Session: 2/21/2012 10:30 AM LOB 206
  • February 23, 2012: Continued Executive Session: 2/23/2012 10:00 AM LOB 301
  • February 23, 2012: Majority Committee Report: Ought to Pass with Amendment #0951h(NT) for Mar 7 (Vote 10-5; RC)
  • February 23, 2012: Proposed Majority Committee Amendment #2012-0951h (New Title)
  • February 23, 2012: Minority Committee Report: Inexpedient to Legislate
  • March 7, 2012: Amendment #0951h(NT) Adopted, VV
  • March 7, 2012: Ought to Pass with Amendment #0951h(NT): MF RC 218-120 Lacking Necessary Three-Fifths Vote
  • March 7, 2012: Inexpedient to Legislate (Rep Serlin)
  • March 7, 2012: Lay On The Table (Rep Bettencourt): MA DIV 244-97 By Necessary Three-Fifths Vote
  • March 21, 2012: Remove From Table (Rep Itse): MA DIV 209-144
  • March 21, 2012: Inexpedient to Legislate: MF DIV 156-200
  • March 21, 2012: Reconsider Ought to Pass (Rep B.Murphy): MF DIV 172-176

Laws It Would Change

Related Bills

  • CACR 19 (1999): relating to 5-year renewable terms for all state judges and the age limit for state judges and county sheriffs. Providing that all state judges be commissioned for renewable 5-year terms and that there shall be no age limit for state judges and county sheriffs.
  • CACR 2 (2011): relating to the tenure of judges. Providing that the general court may specify the term of office served by a judge.

From the General Court