Letter to the editor: JUDICIAL SELECTION IN KANSAS

My name is Bill Mills, of McPherson, Kansas, and I am writing this letter in response to many questions that I have personally received as to whether the proposal to have popular election of the Kansas Supreme Court is advisable.  My answer is a resounding “NO”. 

 I have been practicing law in McPherson, Kansas, for close to 60 years, and, in my opinion, this proposal is a disaster waiting to happen if it is approved.

 I. CURRENT SELECTION BACKGROUND

First and foremost, our Judges are currently “selected” because of a situation that took place in the early 1950’s – the Kansas Governor at that time, Fred Hall, within 10 days of the end of his term, resigned from office.  Lieutenant Governor, John McCuish, was then the acting State Governor.  McCuish then appointed the resigned Governor, Fred Hall, to a position on the Kansas Supreme Court -  Chief Justice Bill Smith (a Hall supporter) was ill and resigned, which opened up a seat on the Supreme Court.  This was condemned at the time as “The Triple Play” - a “flim-flam” if ever there was one.

II. CURRENT SELECTION PROCESS

Following that fiasco, in 1958, the Kansas Legislature set up a Kansas Supreme Court Nominating Commission which is a committee of 9 persons; 4 whom are non-lawyers appointed by the Governor; there are 4 attorneys on the Commission that are selected from each of the Federal Congressional Districts (selected by practicing attorneys); and the chairperson is selected by statewide attorney votes.  This Commission then reviews applicants for appointment to the Court.  Applicant income sources are examined, (as well as review of income tax returns by the Kansas Bureau of Investigation).  Personal interviews are done with the candidates, and the three best qualified persons from within this group are then presented to the Governor who makes the final selection.  

III. CURRENT RETENTION ELECTIONS

Each justice appointed must stand in “general elections” for “removal or retention” every 6 years.  This is the “Merit System”.  This “Merit Selection” has been very reasonable and reliable in selecting well-qualified judges.  It has protected Kansas Citizens with well qualified and dedicated appellate Judges for more than 65 years.  “If it aint broke, don’t fix it”.

IV. CURRENT PROPOSAL – “POPULAR VOTE” / “PAY TO PLAY’

The current proposal presented by the Kansas Legislators (or more correctly, the super majority of the House and Senate), the “popular vote” of your Supreme Court Justices sounds good, but would give rise to a “pay to play” situation.  By this, a very large corporation, a very wealthy individual, or out-of-state money could be poured into the candidacy of a “toadie”.  If he/she is elected, those “donors” may come before the court system, and the inherent prejudice in favor of those money donors is obvious.  Money speaks very loudly when it comes to popular elections – “toadies” could or would bow down to big money doners.

V. LOST TIME

Furthermore, this “Popular Vote” proposal would make judges become “politicians” such that, when his/her election came up, the judge would have to take time off from court obligations to his/her cases, and go on the campaign trail to seek votes for election or re-election.  Crowded dockets (which currently take a long time for cases to be heard and decided), would be slowed down even further while the campaign is going on.  The judge would have to take time to meet with potential voters in the State of Kansas from Goodland to Pittsburg, and Liberal to Atchinson – thereby slowing cases even more.

Kansans should not be fooled by the seduction of “popular vote” for our Supreme Court Justices.  The proposal has predictable consequences which could be disastrous.  Our current Merit Selection System was built to provide qualified justices - and is preferable to “pay to play”.

I urge all reasonable Kansans to vote “NO”.

citizen journal provides space for healthy debate to thrive via letters to the editor. We welcome a variety of viewpoints. If you want to submit your own, learn more here.

Found a mistake? Have a news tip or feedback to share? Contact our newsroom using the button below: