Lawmakers push to list party affiliations in judicial contests

November

COLUMBUS — 2022 ballots could include the partisan affiliations for candidates for the Ohio Supreme Court and other state judicial races, if a bill introduced this week by state lawmakers were to become law.

Republican-sponsored bills introduced this week in the Ohio House of Representatives and Senate also would apply to races for the state courts of appeals, but not county and municipal court races. Similar legislation got preliminary approval from a House committee in December, but it was never voted on by the full House or Senate, and the bill expired at the end of the year, requiring it to be re-introduced.

Under current law, judicial candidates run in partisan primaries, but their partisan affiliations aren’t listed in November. There also are extensive ethical rules in place that limit political campaigning by judges, including restrictions on attacking opponents and fundraising, meant to prevent the perception that judges are swayed by political influence.

If approved, the bill could have major ramifications for state judicial races. While losing most other statewide races in recent years, Democrats have had recent success gaining seats on the state Supreme Court, with Republicans now holding a narrow 4-3 majority. Republican judges, meanwhile, routinely win appellate races in areas with heavy Democratic majorities, including in Cuyahoga, Franklin and Hamilton counties. If partisan affiliations were listed on the November ballot, it would be much less likely that either would happen.

State Rep. Brian Stewart, a sponsor of the House version of the bill, downplayed the political ramifications for the bill, saying either party could see a benefit depending on the specific election year and the type of judicial office.

“I think the goal here is not to put any weights on the scales, but to just acknowledge the situation that we already have,” said Stewart, a Pickaway County Republican and lawyer who took office in January. “Which is that these judges already run in partisan primaries, they already appear on partisan slate cards and they seek partisan endorsements. The only people who are disadvantaged in this situation are the voters who would like to have this information, but are deprived of it.”

Some judges and the Ohio State Bar Association have pushed back against listing party affiliation for judicial candidates, saying it would increase the perception that the courts are partisans, and not independent interpreters of the law. A major critic is Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, a Republican who is leaving her seat next year due to age limits for judges.

In September, O’Connor sharply criticized the Ohio Republican Party after the party used its social media accounts to attack a Democratic Franklin County judge’s ruling on elections-related lawsuits filed by the Ohio Democratic Party. The party deleted the posts and apologized.

In a January interview, O’Connor brought up a 2012 state Supreme Court case over legislative redistricting in which she joined a dissenting opinion. The majority opinion largely favored Republicans, and she said she got some criticism from members in her party for not joining the majority.

“I broke away from the mold in some people’s minds,” O’Connor said in January. “And so again, party affiliation should not – and people have to understand it should not – have anything to do with how a judge does their job.”

But Stewart said the “cat is out of the bag” when it comes to partisan affiliation for judges. He said media accounts routinely list judges’ party affiliations in accounts of prominent judicial decisions.