Bar weathers stormy session.

With sweeping proposals to do away with all judicial nominating commissions, require appellate judges to run for election and place the regulation of lawyers under legislative control, the top story from The Florida Bar's perspective may well be what did not pass during the just completed legislative session.

"The independence of the courts and the independence of the Bar came under unprecedented attack this year," said Bar President Herman Russomanno. "From term limits on judges, to requiring appellate judges standing for retention to get a two-thirds approval rating, to the dismantling of The Florida Bar, there were a host of dangerous proposals that were raised which would have impacted our system of justice in a detrimental way."

Russomanno said he is "extremely proud" the lawyers of Florida worked diligently to see that those "repressive measures" were not adopted.

Russomanno also thanked those members of the House and Senate who believe in the independence of the judiciary and the Bar for their efforts throughout the session.

"These individuals worked diligently throughout the 60-day session," Russomanno said. "Because of their efforts, we can continue to have an independent Bar and judiciary."

Russomanno also warned that lawyers need to be ever vigilant in the future to guard against attacks on the judiciary and the Bar.

"This year should serve as a call to action to the profession," Russomanno said. "Judges, by their very nature in their role in. government, are not in a strong position to advocate before the legislature, it falls to lawyers to protect the independence of the courts," Russomanno said.

One proposal the Bar fought hardest to defeat, Russomanno said, was HJR 627, sponsored by Rep. Fred Brummer, R-Apopka, and Sen. Rudy Garcia, R-Hialeah, which would have amended the Florida Constitution to significantly restructure Article V relating to court jurisdiction, judicial selection and retention, judicial campaign practices, Supreme Court rulemaking, and lawyer regulation by the Bar.

The bill would have allowed the governor to fill directly all appellate vacancies with the consent of the Senate. It would also set a two-year minimum limit on writs of habeas corpus and give the legislature vastly increased powers over court procedural rules.

And those were only some of the changes in the 36-page measure. Others, Russomanno said, would have the state revert to systems and practices which were purposefully changed decades ago to provide accountability and remove politics from the system.

"Floridians expect fairness and impartiality in the court system and their expectations are justified and attainable," Russomanno said. "But the efforts to stampede the judicial branch and the legal profession with unwarranted changes such as those that were proposed in HB 627 are completely contrary to what Floridians clearly want."

Russomanno said the bill, which died in committee, was an all out assault on the independence of the Bar and the judiciary and would have "set back our system of justice well over 100 years."

Other bills affecting the Bar and the courts which died during the session include:

* HJR 1767, sponsored by Rep. Jerry Melvin, R-Ft. Walton Beach, and SJR 1794, sponsored by Sen. Garcia, both died m committee, but would have disbanded the Bar as an arm of the Supreme Court: The virtually identical bills would have instead created a Board of Law Practice within the Department of Business and Professional Regulation to assume Bar duties and converted The Florida Bar into private, voluntary, not-for-profit corporation ion chartered by the legislature."

* HB 27, sponsored by Rep. Brummer, which would have reconfigured the judicial nominating commissions to reflect three Florida Bar appointees, four governor's appointees, one appointee of the Senate president, and one appointee of the Speaker of the House, was withdrawn from further, consideration on January 9.

* HJR 655, sponsored by Rep. Carey Baker, R-Eustis, died in committee. This bill would have removed Supreme Court justices from the current merit retention process and subjected them to statewide election to one term of eight years without option for future Supreme Court service.

* HJR 783, sponsored by Rep. Randy Johnson, R-Winter Garden, which would have removed both Supreme Court justices and DCA judges from the current merit retention process, also died in committee. he bill also would have reduced the terms of office for all judges from six to four ears and imposed an eight-year term limit to all judicial offices

* HJR 827, sponsored by Rep. Brummer, died in committee. It would have amended the constitution to revise the judicial selection process by allowing the governor, with consent and advice from the Senate, to nominate and appoint JNC-approved candidates to vacant judgeships. The JNCs would have determined candidate's "eligibility" for the judgeship, then certified a list of all eligible candidates to forward to the governor.

* SB 1362, sponsored by Sen. Anna Cowin, R-Leesburg, would have removed Supreme Court justices and DCA judges from the. current merit retention process and allowed the governor, with confirmation from the Senate, to appoint people nominated by a JNC to vacant judgeships. Had it not died in committee, the bill also would have imposed a two-term limit on Supreme Court justices and DCA judges.

* HB 1651, sponsored by Rep. Allan Bense, R-Panama City, would have combined the JNC changes in HB 367 with selected elements from the 1999 Tort Reform Bill, which was recently declared unconstitutional for its over breadth. The tort reform portion' of the bill, which died in committee, would have added measures for voluntary trial resolution, expedited trials, actions against contractors, negligence case reporting, various statutes of limitation and repose, subsequent remedial measures, various defenses, negligent hiring, premises liability, punitive damages, employee leasing, and attorneys' fees.

* SJR 1860, sponsored by Sen. Cowin, died in committee. The bill would have changed the constitution to provide for Senate confirmation of gubernatoriallynominated judicial candidates. The governor would have received a list of all eligible applicants, which the governor would make his nominations, and all deliberations would become public.

* HB 1769, sponsored by Rep. Melvin, would have extended to judicial branch agencies the prohibition against using funds to retain a lobbyist. The bill died in committee. (The Bar took no position on this bill.)

* HB 1977, sponsored by the House Committee on Fiscal Responsibility, (ultimately passed as SB 1784) -- which mostly dealt with technical budget issues -- was amended to remove provisions that would have placed the Bar's and the Board of Bar Examiners' budgets under legislative control.

"Many of these bills were seriously considered in committee and were a threat to pass at one point or another," Russomanno said. "Some would have made judges so dependent on the political process that their decisions could become influenced by the political climate."

Russomanno said it was only through the diligent efforts of the lawyers of Florida, the Board of Governors, and other concerned individuals that the Bar was able to derail these proposals.