Arkansas courts play Musical Chairs
In simplified terms, there are four levels of courts in the Arkansas judicial system: m District Court—which holds trials for small claims, traffic tickets, misdemeanors, and other lesser matters.
■ Circuit Court—which holds trials for larger claims and felonies.
■ Court of Appeals—which hears appeals on less novel issues.
■ Supreme Court—which hears ap- peals on more novel issues.
For courts above the District Court, judges have a quasi-term limit, because sitting judges winning re-election after the age of 70 forfeit any pension. They all rationally retire before losing benefits.
Judges on the Circuit Court or higher qualify for full pensions at 62 if they serve 10 years. Those serving 14 years can quit any time and collect a pension at 65. Judges serving 20 years on any court along with other government service can retire with pension benefits at any age.
In contrast, the District Court has a separate pay and retirement plan and no age limitation. Judges retiring from the other Arkansas courts can become district judges and collect both their other-court pensions and District Court salaries at the same time.
Predictably, these rules have resulted in some perverse behavior.
Herb Wright is a 60-year-old sitting Circuit Court judge in the middle of a six-year term. He started as a District Court judge in 2003 and was first elected to the Circuit Court in 2008. His current term ends in 2026. Yet he is currently running for District (traffic) Court in Little Rock. What gives?
Wright has served long enough that he can retire, collect his Circuit Court pension, and stockpile a District Court judge’s salary to boot. Wright is a liberal.
Robert Tellez is running for the same position as Wright. Tellez was once my student. That notwithstanding, he’s very bright and motivated. He handles cases every day in District Court.
I endorse Tellez. He’s in it for the right reasons—not the paycheck.
Current Pulaski County Circuit judges Chip Welch and Mackie Pierce are aged out of running again for the Circuit Court. So, rather than retiring, they’re also running for District Court positions to desperately double-dip from the public fisc.
Beth Burgess and Jill Kamps are running against Welch and Pierce, respectively. Kamps has been a deputy prosecutor for 19 years and a division chief for the last six. I don’t know Burgess and Kamps, but I’ll vote for them every day over judicial Gordon Geckos seeking to double-dip.
Liberal Justice Courtney Hudson is young enough to run for re-election in 2026 when her term on the Supreme Court expires. Yet she’s running now for another spot on the same court, which opened after the recent death of Justice Robin F. Wynne. The governor temporarily filled that position for a year with conservative Cody Hiland.
Hudson is doing this because the Supreme Court has staggered terms. If Hudson runs for the spot open this year and wins, she squeezes out several more years on the court riskfree before she must seek re-election, and locks in her 20 years of service for immediate pension benefits upon term completion.
However, something else is afoot. Three justices—two conservative (Barbara Webb and Rhonda K. Wood) and one liberal (Karen R. Baker) currently are vying for the open chief justice position. If one wins, the governor likely will again appoint Hiland—who by law can’t run for Wynne’s former seat—to the non-chief position newly opened by Webb, Wood, or Baker elevating to chief.
In that case, Hiland would be perfectly positioned to run against Hudson in 2026, having just served two temporary, roughly one-year terms on the court as a conservative justice. So, Hudson has every reason to fear keeping her current spot rather than pushing off her re-election for four years.
If Hudson wins Wynne’s former seat, she guarantees that her own newly opened spot will be filled by the governor with a conservative. If Hudson doesn’t run now, however, another liberal could theoretically take Wynne’s former seat. So Hudson is willing to sacrifice the chance, albeit modest, to increase her liberal-philosophical allies on the court in exchange for personal advancement.
Hudson’s current candidacy isn’t quite as shamefully greedy as those of Pierce, Welch, and Wright, but it’s a remarkable piece of “strategery” designed to milk every bit of time she can get on the court before a conservative thankfully forces her out.
We like to believe that judges serve for the good of the people while earning well-deserved salaries and benefits. But too often this description is inverted. Some judges serve for the salaries and benefits, with the good of the people occupying the secondary role.
This is your right to know.