Judicial retirement; increases mandatory age from 73 to 75.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 83 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on SB 83.
You're tracking SB 83
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 83 — Judicial retirement; increases mandatory age from 73 to 75.
Last action — Passed by indefinitely in Judiciary (12-Y 3-N)
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed House of Delegates
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2022 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
Mandatory judicial retirement age. Increasesthe mandatory judicial retirement age from 73 to 75. This increasein mandatory retirement age includes judges subject to mandatoryretirement during the 2022 Regular Session of the General Assemblyand allows any sitting judge who has attained age 73 and has submitteda notice of retirement but not yet retired to revoke the notice ofretirement by written request. The bill requires the revocation ofany certification of need to fill the vacancy determined by the JudicialCouncil or Committee on District Courts based on the original noticeof retirement if a written request to revoke the notice of retirementis submitted by the judge. The bill contains an emergency clause.
Bill Text
- Prefiled Prefiled and ordered printed with emergency clause; offered 01/12/22 22101421D Current pdf January 05, 2022
Action History
-
Passed by indefinitely in Judiciary (12-Y 3-N)
-
Impact statement from VRS (SB83)
-
Referred to Committee on the Judiciary
-
Prefiled and ordered printed with emergency clause; offered 01/12/22 22101421D
Sponsors
- Jr. William M. Stanley · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 147 not signed on · 2 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- William M. Stanley, Jr. Voted No
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (147)
147 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 147 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 12 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 12 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 80% | 20% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (15)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| McClellan, Jennifer L. | — | Yea |
| Morrissey, Joseph D. | — | Yea |
| Edwards, John S. | — | Yea |
| Jennifer B. Boysko | — | Yea |
| L. Louise Lucas | — | Yea |
| Mark D. Obenshain | — | Yea |
| Mark J. Peake | — | Yea |
| Norment, Thomas K., Jr. | — | Nay |
| Petersen, J. Chapman | — | Yea |
| R. Creigh Deeds | — | Nay |
| Richard H. Stuart | — | Yea |
| Ryan T. McDougle | — | Yea |
| Saslaw, Richard L. | — | Yea |
| Scott A. Surovell | — | Yea |
| William M. Stanley, Jr. | — | Nay |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 83 do?
- Mandatory judicial retirement age. Increasesthe mandatory judicial retirement age from 73 to 75. This increasein mandatory retirement age includes judges subject to mandatoryretirement during the 2022 Regular Session of the General Assemblyand allows any sitting judge who has attained age 73 and has submitteda notice of retirement but not yet retired to revoke the notice ofretirement by written request. The bill requires the revocation ofany certification of need to fill the vacancy determined by the JudicialCouncil or Committee on District Courts based on the original noticeof retirement if a written request to revoke the notice of retirementis submitted by the judge. The bill contains an emergency clause.
- Who sponsors SB 83?
- SB 83 is sponsored by William M. Stanley, Jr..
- What is the current status of SB 83?
- This bill died with 2022 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track SB 83?
- Track SB 83 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 83
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 83
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →