In South Dakota the recall may be invoked against city officials, and this process of re moval has been adopted in some cities of Massachusetts, New jersey, Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Wyoming, Idaho, Nevada, Wash ington, etc. Sweeping recall amendmentshave been adopted in California (1911), Nevada and Colorado (1912, the law of the latter State applying to judicial decisions also), and in 1912 Arizona struck from the recall provision in its 1911 constitution the clause which excepted electivejudicial officers from the operation of the recall. In 1912 Idaho and Washington, in 1913 Michigan and in 1914 Louisiana adopted amendments which niade the recall operative against all State officials except the judiciary. In 1914 Kansas adopted a law which applies to appointive as well as to elective officers. In 1912 the Arizona legislature adopted a measure the intent of which was to apply the recall to United States senators, representatives and judges, but since these officials hold office un der the Federal Constitution they are not di rectly amenable to recall in a State election. As regards a Federal judge the people may advise his resignation and suggest to the Presi dent a person they deem fitted for the position, but the question of action on the advice given depends entirely upon the judge and the Presi dent. Respecting senators and representatives, however, the advisory recall is of great moment; the candidates, who are nominated in direct primaries, are afforded the option of pledging or refusing to pledge themselves to obey an advisory vote of recall and few care to incur public opposition by withholding the pledge.
The recall of judicial decisions was proposed by Mr. Roosevelt in 1912, his idea being that le should have the right not only to decision itself but to ratify or dis approve the constitutional principle upon which the decision was based. On 21 Feb. 1912, when addressing . the Ohio constitutional convention, he said: aIf any considerable number of peo ple feel that a decision is in defiance of justice, they should be given the right by petition to bring before the voters at some subsequent elec tion, special or otherwise, as might be decided, and after the fullest opportunity for deliberation and debate, the question whether or not the judges' interpretation of the constitution is to be sustained.* In 1912 the people of Colorado initiated and adopted an amendment to the State constitution providing for the recall of judicial decisions, the use of the referendum being granted to the people for the purpose of ordering the enforcement of a statute which, after passage by the legislature and approval by the governor, has been vetoed by the State Supreme Court. See INITIATIVE; REFER