Arkansas Supreme Court Sought New Pay Law
The court requested that state lawmakers establish a compensation framework for special justices.
Updated on Oct. 1, 2026 in Law
Live Poll
Should state lawmakers update compensation policies for temporary judicial appointees in your area?
The Arkansas Supreme Court released an opinion identifying a need for updated legislation regarding special justice compensation. Current statutes only provide $100 per case, which the court determined is insufficient for extended service appointments.
Why it matters
The lack of an established pay framework for long-term judicial replacements highlights a gap in state code. Clarifying these payments is necessary to ensure the functionality of the court when regular justices are unable to serve.
Current state law provides a flat rate of $100 per case for special justices. The court noted this structure fails to address the financial requirements of extended judicial service appointments.
The players
Cory Cox
He is a special justice appointed by the governor to serve as a temporary replacement on the Arkansas Supreme Court.
Barbara Webb
She is an associate justice of the Arkansas Supreme Court currently unable to serve due to health concerns.
Sarah Sanders
She is the Governor of Arkansas and the official responsible for the appointment of the special justice.
Arkansas Supreme Court
This is the highest judicial body in the state, responsible for interpreting state law and managing judicial administration.
The details
The Supreme Court issued the opinion after finding that existing Arkansas statutes do not adequately compensate temporary judges appointed for long-term roles. Special Justice Cory Cox is currently serving in this capacity while Associate Justice Barbara Webb remains unable to perform her duties due to health reasons.
Timeline
September 24, 2026: The Supreme Court released the formal opinion regarding justice pay.
December 31, 2026: The current appointment term for Special Justice Cory Cox ends.
Political Context
Legislators may push back on potential salary increases for judicial appointees, citing the need for strict fiscal responsibility within state government. Opposition members could argue that existing per-case payment structures are sufficient to manage judicial temporary staffing.
This request highlights how administrative gaps in state law can impact the functioning of the judicial system. Taxpayers may eventually see budget adjustments if the legislature decides to formalize a new salary structure for these temporary roles.
The takeaway
The court's request underscores the difficulty of applying outdated fee-for-service models to modern long-term professional appointments. Establishing clear compensation guidelines is essential for maintaining the stability of the state's highest court.
What happens next
The state legislature is expected to review the compensation framework for special justices in a future session.
Further reading
For additional context on local judicial mandates, visit the Law section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by KHBS.
Live Poll
Should state lawmakers update compensation policies for temporary judicial appointees in your area?
