## Facts

- New Jersey voters adopted a state constitutional amendment authorizing recall of elected officials, expressly including U.S. Senators and Representatives, and the Legislature enacted an implementing recall statute.
- A recall committee filed a notice of intention to recall U.S. Senator Robert Menendez with the New Jersey Secretary of State.
- After consulting the Attorney General, the Secretary refused to accept the notice, concluding federal law provides no recall mechanism for federally elected officials and the matter is governed exclusively by the U.S. Constitution.
- The committee sought judicial review, arguing the notice complied with state recall procedures and the Secretary lacked authority to reject a state-constitutional process based on federal constitutional objections.
- The Appellate Division reversed, ordering the Secretary to accept the filing on the ground that the federal constitutional issue was not ripe at the notice stage.
- The New Jersey Supreme Court granted review on the procedural question (ripeness) and the substantive federal constitutional question (state authority to recall a U.S. Senator).

## Issues

1. Whether the dispute was ripe at the notice-of-intention stage, or whether courts should defer the federal constitutional question until later steps in the recall process.
2. Whether the U.S. Constitution permits a state to provide for recall of a sitting U.S. Senator.
3. Whether the Secretary of State must accept and process a recall notice authorized by state law when the recall mechanism is alleged to be invalid under the U.S. Constitution.

## Decision

- The court held the case was ripe because the recall process could not lawfully proceed without resolving whether recall of a U.S. Senator is constitutionally permissible.
- The court held a state lacks authority under the U.S. Constitution to recall a U.S. Senator; the Constitution fixes a six-year term and provides an exclusive removal mechanism (Senate expulsion).
- The court reversed the Appellate Division and upheld the Secretary’s refusal to accept the recall notice, effectively terminating the recall effort.

## Legal Principles

- Justiciability: When a threshold constitutional defect would bar the entire statutory process, the dispute may be ripe at the earliest procedural stage.
- Federal structure and text: States may not shorten or condition a U.S. Senator’s constitutionally prescribed six-year term through recall; removal outside the Constitution’s specified method (Senate expulsion) is not permitted.
- Supremacy Clause: State constitutional and statutory provisions are unenforceable to the extent they conflict with the U.S. Constitution’s scheme for federal office tenure and removal.
- State official duties: State election officials are not required to accept filings or administer procedures that would initiate a process invalid under the U.S. Constitution.

## Conclusion

The New Jersey Supreme Court concluded that recall of a U.S. Senator is not authorized by the U.S. Constitution and that the challenge was ripe at the notice stage, so the Secretary of State could reject the recall notice and halt the process before signature gathering or an election occurred.


Comm. to Recall Robert Menendez from the Off. of U.S. Senator v. Wells, 204 N.J. 79, 7 A.3d 720 (2010)