KS Supreme Court amendment would reintroduce politics to the bench
Justices haven’t been elected since the 1950’s
LET’S MOVE TO KANSAS NOW, WHERE AN AMENDMENT ON THE PRIMARY BALLOT HAS MAJOR IMPLICATIONS. THIS ONE HAS TO DO WITH THE KANSAS SUPREME COURT AND HOW JUSTICES MAKE IT TO THE BENCH, HOW THEY GET THEIR JOBS. RIGHT NOW, THEY’RE APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR AFTER A NINE PERSON NOMINATING COMMISSION VETS THEM. THAT INCLUDES BACKGROUND CHECKS, INTERVIEWS AND MORE BEFORE THE TOP THREE CANDIDATES MAKE IT TO THIS IS A PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 1958, APPROVED BY VOTERS AFTER A JUDICIAL SHELL GAME SCANDAL DUBBED THE TRIPLE PLAY. OPPONENTS THINK REVERSING THIS IS A HOME RUN. THEY WANT VOTERS TO CHANGE THE STATE CONSTITUTION TO MAKE JUSTICES ELECTED POSITION. CRITICS WORRY A CHANGE WOULD POLITICIZE THE COURTS AND ALLOW FOR JUSTICES TO BE BOUGHT AND SOLD. THEY’RE VERY SERIOUS ABOUT WHAT THEY DO A GOOD JOB OF INTERVIEWING, AND THEY MAKE GOOD DECISIONS. THIS HAS TO DO WITH VOTERS BEING LEFT OUT OF A SYSTEM THAT PRIORITIZES A SMALL GROUP OF POLITICALLY, MANY REPUBLICAN LEADERS ARE PUSHING FOR THIS AMENDMENT TO PASS, WITH SOME SIGNALING IT COULD EASE CHANGES ON MAJOR ISSUES LIKE ABORTION AND SCHOOL FUNDING. WE’LL GET TO THAT IN A MOMENT. AGAIN, A YES VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT WOULD MEAN JUSTICES WOULD HAVE TO RUN FOR ELECTION AND HOLD SIX YEAR TERMS IF THEY WIN. A NO VOTE MEANS CONTINUING THE LONG STANDING PROCESS OF VETTING, NOMINATING COMMISSION BEFORE THE GOVERNOR APPOINTS THOSE JUSTICES. LET’S DISCUSS THE IMPACT OF THIS ISSUE. A LOT TO TALK ABOUT. MICHEAL MAHONEY IS STICKING AROUND. JOINED BY SHERMAN SMITH, EDITOR IN CHIEF OF THE KANSAS REFLECTOR. LET’S START OFF WITH THE MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION. SHERMAN. WHY CHANGE THIS NOW? WHAT’S THE MOTIVATION HERE? I THINK REPUBLICAN LEADERS HAVE BEEN CLEAR IN SAYING THEY DON’T LIKE SOME OF THE COURT’S RULINGS, AND THAT THEY SEE THIS AS A WAY OF GETTING RULINGS THAT THEY DO LIKE, SPECIFICALLY ON THE OVERTURNING THE THE RULING WHERE THE COURT FOUND A RIGHT TO TERMINATE A PREGNANCY IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION. AND ALSO THEY’VE BEEN CLEAR ABOUT SAYING THEY DON’T LIKE THE SCHOOL FUNDING RULINGS THAT THEY’VE GOTTEN OVER THE YEARS. SO THIS IS REALLY ABOUT GETTING MORE FAVORABLE RULINGS ON KEY ISSUES. YEAH. THE THE REPUBLICANS HERE BELIEVE THAT THE COURT, THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS IS NOT LISTENING TO VOTERS, THAT THEY’RE MAKING RULINGS BASED ON THE LAW AND THAT THEY’VE THEY’RE OVER THEIR SKIS, IF YOU WILL, AND THAT THE VOTERS AND THE COURT SHOULD BE A LITTLE MORE CLOSELY ALIGNED. SO THEY WOULD LIKE A COURT THAT IS MORE REFLECTIVE OF THE TONE OF KANSAS POLITICS RIGHT NOW. THERE ARE THE SEVEN MEMBERS ON THE COURT. FIVE HAVE BEEN APPOINTED BY DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR SEBELIUS AND KELLY IN PARTICULAR, AND TWO WERE APPOINTED BY SAM BROWNBACK WE’RE TALKING ABOUT THE THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE AND FOLLOWING THE VOTERS. VOTERS DID APPROVE PROTECTIONS FOR ABORTIONS IN KANSAS. JUST. REPUBLICANS AREN’T VERY HAPPY ABOUT THAT. RIGHT, RIGHT. AND THEY THINK THAT VOTE ON THAT AMENDMENT A FEW YEARS AGO WAS WAS IN ERROR AND THAT THEY BELIEVED THAT KANSANS ARE MUCH MORE CONSERVATIVE ON THE ISSUE OF ABORTION AND PERHAPS SCHOOL FUNDING AND AND OTHER THINGS THAN TO REFLECT IT IN THE COURT. INTERESTING, IMPORTANT TO NOTE, SHERMAN, THAT VOTERS HAVE WEIGHED IN ON SUPREME COURT JUSTICES BEFORE VOTING TO RETAIN JUDGES AT THE POLLS FOR MORE THAN 60 YEARS. YEAH, I MEAN, IT’S KIND OF SEEN AS THE FAIL IN THE SYSTEM. THERE’S THE NOMINATING COMMISSION THAT VETS THE APPLICANTS. THEY GIVE THREE NAMES TO THE GOVERNOR. THE GOVERNOR CHOOSES ONE, AND THEN THAT THAT JUSTICE HAS TO STAND FOR ELECTION WITHIN A YEAR OR IN THE NEXT THE NEXT ELECTION CYCLE. AND SO VOTERS CAN KICK THEM OUT OF OFFICE IF THEY DON’T LIKE, THEY HAVE TO COME BACK EVERY SIX YEARS AFTER THAT TO FACE RETENTION VOTES AGAIN. SO VOTERS DO GET TO WEIGH IN ON THE CURRENT SYSTEM. SEVERAL STATES, MAHONEY, HAVE ELECTIONS FOR STATE SUPREME COURT. IT’S COMMON IN MANY STATES. WHAT WOULD THE IMPACT BE IF KANSAS CHANGED? IF IT CHANGED, CHANGED? THE ADVOCATES SAY THAT VOTERS WOULD HAVE A MORE DIRECT IMPACT ON ON THE ON THE SELECTION OF IT. ALSO, THEY THEY SAY THAT IT WOULD IT WOULD STOP INSIDERS. AND IN THIS CASE, THE KANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION IS WHAT THEY’RE REFERRING TO FROM SELECTING ALL THE JUDGES. THERE ARE ALSO CITIZENS THAT ARE ON THAT PANEL. THE FOLKS THAT DO NOT LIKE THIS CHANGE IN THE COURT SAYS IT WOULD OPEN UP THE PROCESS TO POLITICAL CAMPAIGN MONEY. AND ALL OF THAT SORT OF THINGS THAT GO TO GO WITH IT. SURE. AND WE’VE ALREADY SEEN SO MUCH MONEY, MILLIONS OF DOLLARS MOVING NOW FOR AND AGAINST THIS AMENDMENT HERE ON THE ON THE A YEAR AGO NOW, WHERE MILLIONS WERE SPENT ON ELECTION ELECTING SUPREME COURT JUDGES THERE. THERE’S A LOT
KS Supreme Court amendment would reintroduce politics to the bench
Justices haven’t been elected since the 1950’s
