Proposal to raise judicial retirement age to 73 draws bipartisan discussion

John Cardin and longtime bar leader Raphael J. Santini presented HB638, a constitutional amendment proposal to raise Maryland judges’ mandatory retirement age from 70 to 73.

Cardin and Santini argued the change reflects increases in life expectancy and regional practice (Virginia 73, D.C. 74, Pennsylvania 75), would save actuarial pension costs and could increase the pool of later‑career private practitioners who can consider judicial service. Santini said extending the age would improve representativeness and allow experienced private‑sector attorneys to be competitive for judicial vacancies.

Members probed whether the change would be prospective only (an amendment accepted on the floor makes it prospective), how it affects gubernatorial appointment patterns and whether the change risks prolonging service for judges whose capacity declines. Witnesses noted Maryland already has a Judicial Disabilities process and that judicial removal or recusal procedures exist for incapacity.

Supporters said the change is modest, regional practice supports it and the constitutional amendment requires voter approval, which provides an additional check. Some members suggested revisiting the age later, while others praised the measure for updating an 1851 provision.