A court chosen by and for progressives

On the ballot this August in the great state of Kansas is one of the most consequential constitutional amendments voters have faced in decades, and not enough people are talking about it.

Next month, when voters go to the polls for the primaries ahead of November elections, they will also get to decide whether to amend the Kansas Constitution regarding how the state Supreme Court justices are selected. And the stakes couldn’t be any higher.

If you have paid any attention to Kansas state politics over the past several decades, you know that the state Supreme Court has been disastrous for common good legislation. Even though the state is deeply red, with a current supermajority in the Kansas Legislature and a majority slate of conservative representatives in Washington, reform efforts consistently run into a progressive buzzsaw at the state’s highest court. This court has an absurd knack for inventing constitutional rights out of thin air in order to thwart common sense legislation, and the U.S. Supreme Court has overturned the court’s decisions several times in recent years.

Here’s the bottom line: The problems at the Kansas Supreme Court stem directly from how its members are selected, which is antithetical to the will of the body politic. This must change.

Currently, the way the Kansas Supreme Court is appointed has more in common with oligarchy than representative democracy. The current appointment process involves an unelected body that selects three candidates who they deem eligible to fill vacancies on the Court. The sitting governor then selects one of these pre-vetted candidates. The glaring problem with this system is that this deliberative body charged with choosing the three candidates consists of a majority appointed by a minority of members of the Kansas Bar, which has an elitist ideology that is counter to the majority of Kansans.

What many don’t know is that this hasn’t always been the process. For the first 100 years of the state’s history, the Kansas Supreme Court was selected via direct election, which is the way more than half of the states in our union select their members of their Supreme Court today. And on the ballot this August, Kansas voters can elect to rein in their rogue court and put things back the way they were by voting “Yes” to return their state’s Constitution to the original process.

What happens if this amendment fails? Then regardless of how strongly voters and legislators support conservative values regarding life, liberty, and the family, the Kansas Supreme Court will continue to overrule the will of the people via a packed slate of predetermined progressives chosen by unelected bodies in Topeka’s political backrooms.

As the past several decades of national politics have made clear, voters must pay attention and hold accountable every branch of government: the executive, legislative, and judicial. Too often, liberal courts with lifetime appointments have steered the country in a direction the vast majority does not want to go. This is currently happening in Kansas, and next month Kansans have a chance at a remedy.

While a new process does not guarantee conservative outcomes—voters still must faithfully go to the polls year in and year out and make their will known—it does provide the people an opportunity to hold justices accountable if they stray from the original meaning of the Kansas Constitution.