The Missouri Supreme Court Building in Jefferson City (Jason Hancock/Missouri Independent).
As Americans, we don’t have much influence on the U.S. Supreme Court. The president, who we indirectly elect via the Electoral College, decides who to appoint, and then the U.S. Senate votes whether or not to confirm.
Many of the decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court affect our daily lives, but we as voters can’t change who sits on the court or for how long.
Following the model set by the U.S. Constitution, many state constitutions initially called for governors to appoint state judges for life with the advice and consent of the state’s Senate. Over time, many felt that this system empowered governors to award judgeships based upon party loyalty rather than judicial temperament and fair-mindedness.
In 1940, Missouri became the first state to adopt what is now called the “Missouri Plan” for selecting judges, which involves two elements: “assisted appointments” and nonpartisan ”retention elections.”
Today, more than 30 states use some form of assisted appointments. More than 20 states use some variation of retention elections. More than a dozen states use both in some capacity.
Advocates of Missouri’s nonpartisan court plan argue that the reforms have been a success. According to Sandra Day O’Connor, the first woman to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, “the ‘Show-Me State’ … has shown the nation how we can do a better job of selecting our judges.”
The way that assisted appointments typically work is that a nonpartisan commission reviews candidates for state judgeships and creates a list of potential nominees based on merit. The governor fills vacancies on the bench by choosing from this predetermined list. In such a system, the governor’s pick does not usually need to be confirmed by the state legislature because the pick has already been vetted by the nonpartisan commission.
For retention elections, judges face no opponent and are listed on the ballot without political party designation. Voters are simply asked whether an incumbent judge should remain in office, which provides an opportunity to oust judges who make unpopular decisions.
This November, Missourians will vote on whether or not to retain two Missouri Supreme Court judges — both of whom have recently made decisions that are popular or unpopular depending upon how you feel about abortion rights.
Amendment 3, if approved by voters, will legalize abortion up until the point of fetal viability and protect other reproductive rights, including access to birth control. At present, abortion is illegal in Missouri with only limited exceptions for certain medical emergencies. There are no exceptions for rape or incest.
To road to getting Amendment 3 onto the November ballot was long and winding. At one point it even made its way to the Missouri Supreme Court, which eventually voted 4-3 to keep the amendment on the ballot.
Of the three judges that voted to remove it from the ballot, two will face retention elections in November. Kelly Broniec and Ginger Gooch were both appointed by Gov. Mike Parson. If either or both of them are retained, they will go on to serve a twelve-year term. If either or both lose their retention election, their current term will expire on Dec. 31.
On Nov. 5, Missourians will vote on a variety of important issues including who they think should be the next president, who they think should be the next governor and whether or not they feel that abortion should become legal in certain situations.
Often overlooked by many voters is their power to influence the Missouri Supreme Court through retention elections.
If you think Missouri should keep one of the country’s strictest abortion bans in place, then it may be in your best interest to vote to retain Broniec and Gooch, as they were both willing to kick Amendment 3 off the ballot.
If you think Missourians should have a constitutional right to reproductive freedom, then it may be in your best interest to vote that Broniec and Gooch should not be retained — as try tried to prevent you from even having the chance to vote on Amendment 3.