In a closet in his Inman Park home, Joe Drolet keeps a certificate that puts him in the same league as James Madison and Alexander Hamilton: constitutional framer.

No, the 76-year-old wasn't in Philadelphia for the Constitutional Convention of 1787, but Drolet served for five years on the commission that drafted the 1983 Georgia Constitution, working specifically on the section regarding the judiciary. His role was highlighted by judges on both sides of the May 14 state Supreme Court decision that said the governor, not an election, would determine who replaces outgoing Justice Keith Blackwell.

Presiding Justice David Nahmias, Supreme Court of Georgia. (Photo: John Disney/ALM)

Presiding Justice David Nahmias, writing for the 6-2 majority, reached back 43 years to a transcript of a commission meeting in which Drolet was asked how their proposed changes would affect a situation somewhat similar to the one involving Blackwell. He announced Feb. 28 he would vacate his seat on Nov. 18, one day shy of six months after the May 19 election (which was moved to June due to the COVID-19 crisis); the state government then canceled the election for his seat, despite two candidates, John Barrow and Beth Beskin, wishing to run for it.

Back in 1977, Drolet was asked what happens "if you have a Judge appointed for a vacancy less than six months prior to the election and others qualified to run in that election."

"Mr. Drolet: That eliminates that election," the transcript reads.

Superior Court Judge Brenda Trammell of the Ocmulgee Judicial Circuit, sitting on the high court because five justices recused, dissented but also cited the Drolet comment. (Both jurists noted that language from drafting discussions couldn't determine how the court should rule.)

Judge Brenda H. Trammell, Superior Court Judge, Ocmulgee Judicial Circuit. (Courtesy photo)

Trammell argued Drolet's comments and others weren't applicable to the Blackwell situation, because "There was no discussion of an appointment usurping the results of an election, and the conversations consistently upheld the sanctity of elections."

"That isn't something we contemplated," said Drolet, who served on the commission as an assistant Fulton County district attorney. They were focused on what he called "interim" appointments—judges who replaced others who died or resigned in the middle of their terms.

The commission wanted to change the constitution so that judges appointed to replace a judge early in a term would have to face voters within about two years of their appointment—and at the same time, wouldn't have to face voters immediately if appointed less than six months before an election.

Drolet said he's been amazed over the 40 years how many judges resign before their term is up and give an appointment to the governor. "I presumed people … would want to let the people choose." He wondered if incumbent judges trust a process by which the governor gets a vetted short list from his Judicial Nominating Commission more than voters who might elect "a fringe candidate."

On pages 94 and 95 of the decision, Trammell in her dissent listed several odd scenarios that could occur under the majority holding, such as "The incumbent runs for election, loses, and then resigns, only to be re-appointed by the Governor."

"I do not see a great fear of that happening," said Drolet, but he added a concern over another situation–that of a judge "reserving a vacancy" far into the future.

Drolet said a constitutional amendment would be required to change the rules as interpreted by the majority decision, unless another case forces more litigation. "I don't think this decision is necessarily the last word," he said.

As for what he thinks of the decision, Drolet said: "I would consider it very interesting."