Fifty-eight Sunflower State attorneys have signed an open letter calling for passage of the amendment to the Kansas State Constitution to allow for direct election of justices to the Kansas Supreme Court.
“As attorneys, we recognize that this amendment would require our profession to relinquish a privilege that attorneys have held for decades, the ability to vote for attorney members of the Kansas Supreme Court Nominating Commission,” the release reads. “While we respect the commission and the attorneys who have faithfully served on it, we believe the time has come to place all Kansans on equal footing in the process of selecting the state’s highest court.”
Kansas is the only state in the Union in which an attorney-dominated nominating commission — composed of 5 attorneys and four non-lawyers — selects nominees to the Kansas Supreme Court.
Opponents, such as the American Civil Liberties Union, say giving ordinary residents the opportunity to have a voice in judicial selection would “completely alter the balance between judicial independence and political influence in our state.”
“If partisan campaigning and outside spending become the keys to judicial selection, this would create real risks for how legal protections are applied and enforced,” the Kansas chapter of the ACLU said on its website. “Particularly for our most vulnerable populations, and the results could affect the lives of every Kansan.”
That is simply not the case, according to the signatories.
“This amendment does not ask judges to make partisan promises or decide cases based on their political beliefs,” the release states. “No judge should do either. It is about giving the people of Kansas the final say in selecting the members of their highest court.
“We contend that, in a representative government, the people are the proper source of authority. The current system creates a Kansas Constitutional requirement that attorneys have majority control over who can be considered for appointment to the Kansas Supreme Court.”
Moreover, currently, 13 states conduct nonpartisan elections for Supreme Court justices, and eight more conduct partisan elections. While “assisted appointment” is used by 20 states, including Kansas, only Kansas has a nominating commission whose majority of members are lawyers.
Five states use the gubernatorial appointment method, similar to the federal system, and in two more states, judges are appointed by the legislature.
The ACLU also claims the ballot language is “confusing.”
However, the language is quite clear, stating that a “vote for this proposition would give Kansas citizens the right to elect Kansas Supreme Court justices as provided by law,” and that a vote against would continue the current system.
Additionally, as the release points out, if passed, the amendment would simply give Kansans the right to choose their justices.
“We contend that, in a representative government, the people are the proper source of authority. The current system creates a Kansas Constitutional requirement that attorneys have majority control over who can be considered for appointment to the Kansas Supreme Court,” the letter states. “The Right to Vote Amendment takes a different approach. It simply allows Kansans to elect their Supreme Court justices. It does not lock a specific selection process into the Constitution.
“Under the amendment, lawmakers can still choose nonpartisan elections, create either statewide or regional judicial districts, and impose strict campaign finance rules to help keep judges independent and free from outside influence.”
