A politicized State Supreme Court may not sound like an issue on face value, but it is important to understand what is at stake. While some argue this change would increase democratic participation, it 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, particularly for our most vulnerable populations, and the results could affect the lives of every Kansan.

However, many of our fellow Kansans may have little to no knowledge of what's at stake on their 2026 ballot, and we should all be prepared to begin those conversations about rewriting our constitution. Here are some guidelines so you feel prepared to talk with your friends and family about this proposed constitutional amendment.

Similarly to how the language of the anti-abortion amendment of 2022 had many voters confused on how to vote, the same can be said here. The language of the amendment regarding judicial selection is vague and can be difficult for voters to interpret without context, despite its major consequences. One key talking point to keep in mind as you begin conversing with folks about this amendment: Keep politics out of our Courts.

• Justices and judges must be free to rule based on the law.
• The Supreme Court selection process should be outside the political arena.
• We need a Court that can make decisions fairly, regardless of the politics, to uphold the Kansas Constitution and protect our Kansas freedoms.
• Switching to partisan elections for state Supreme Court justices will not actually give power to the people; it will give power to those with the most money.
• When Ohio switched to partisan Supreme Court elections in 2022, hundreds of thousands of dollars from out-of-state special interest groups poured into Ohio t0 influence the outcome of those races.
• We should keep special interest and dark money groups out of our judicial system.
• This amendment would replace a merit-based selection system with one driven by partisan elections and campaign fundraising.
• We should keep the courts non-partisan and ensure experts - not politicians - make these calls.

Supporters of the amendment claim it would allow for more direct elections and therefore a more accountable democracy. But others raise concerns that this approach would likely increase the influence of large donors, political organizations, and outside spending in determining who serves on the court. Here are some other considerations to bring up in response to arguments that direct elections for Supreme Court Justice seats would make justices more accountable.

• The judicial branch is different from the legislative and executive branches and must be free from political influence.
• Political interference will create gridlock and harm the implementation of these critical, community programs.
• Justices must consider cases in the interest of all Kansans, not political agendas.

Supporters of changing the judicial selection process will be busy funding attack ads on the current makeup of the Kansas Supreme Court. Keep in mind:

• The current Nominating Commission is a non-partisan group of Kansans who are both lawyers and non-lawyers and represent a geographically diverse makeup of the state. These folks represent both rural and urban communities and they have one job – to select the top three most qualified applicants for a Supreme Court vacancy and send them to the governor for a final selection.
• Popular elections and Senate confirmations inject politics into our Court system. The Nominating Commission has kept politics out.

This amendment follows a series of Kansas Supreme Court decisions on issues such as school funding and constitutional rights and would shape how future courts approach similar cases. Here are some key points of consideration when engaging in conversations about the potential impacts of this amendment:

• Recent statewide votes and court decisions have highlighted how critical the role of the Kansas Supreme Court is in interpreting our rights. Changes to how justices are selected would directly shape how future decisions are made on issues like abortion rights, school funding, and voting access.
• We should protect the will of Kansas voters and the right of all Kansans to make personal decisions without government getting involved.

The amount of misinformation in the next 14 few months will be considerable. It will be up to all of us to ensure that we have informed conversations and be prepared to oppose this amendment in August 2026.