Kansas Constitutional Amendment Vote August 2026: Potential Reform of the Supreme Court Judicial Selection Process.

Kansas is the only state with a judicial selection process controlled by members of the state bar association. [1] In August of 2026, Kansans will vote on whether or not to return the judicial selection process to a popular vote. Below are details about this proposed constitutional amendment.

What To Know

  • 1. Overview of Constitutional Amendment

     1. Why is there controversy surrounding the way Kansas Supreme Court Justices are Appointed:  


    • According to the non-partisan Ballotpedia, Kansas is the only state in the country with a "bar-controlled" (or merit-selection) method of judicial selection. 
    • In August of 2026, voters in Kansas will decide if they would like to keep the current selection process, or move to the direct election of Supreme Court Justices. 
    • Supporters of direct elections assert that the current system goes against the democratic structure of the American government. 
    • Opponents to the amendment stated that the current system, which is comprised of a commission whose majority is comprised of attorneys, is best positioned to keep politics out of the process of judicial selection.

     2. What the Amendment would do and what it would replace?  


    • This amendment would restore the process of direct elections of Supreme Court justices, a process used for the first 100 years of statehood in Kansas. 
    • It would replace the current method of nomination by the Supreme Court Nominating Commission and confirmation by the governor, which blocks Kansans from having a vote in who their Supreme Court Justices are. The Supreme Court Nominating Commission was put in place in 1958.

     3. When the amendment will be on the ballot?  


    • This amendment will appear on the ballot on August 4th, 2026.

     4. Amendment language that will be on the ballot:   


    • “This amendment gives the voters the right to elect the justices of the Kansas supreme court. The justices shall serve terms of six years, with the elections of justice positions 1, 2 and 3 to occur in 2028, positions 4 and 5 to occur in 2030 and positions 6 and 7 to occur in 2032, and every six years thereafter. The rules applicable for such elections and the designation of position numbers shall be provided by law. Any vacancy on the court for an unexpired term shall be filled at an election as provided by law.  
    • A vote for this proposition would give Kansas citizens the right to elect Kansas supreme court justices as provided by law. Justices will hold office for terms of six years. The Kansas supreme court nominating commission, whose membership consists of a majority of lawyers, would be abolished.  
    • A vote against this proposition would continue the current system in which the Kansas supreme court nominating commission, whose membership consists of a majority of lawyers, provides the governor a list of three individuals to choose from for vacancies on the Kansas supreme court. Justices hold office for a term of six years and retain their offices if they win a retention election in which they do not face an opponent.”

  • 2. History of Changes to Judicial Selection in Kansas

     1. Original Constitution - 1861  


    • When Kansas became a state in 1861, its constitution required the direct election of Supreme Court Justices. 
    • The Supreme Court Justices served six-year terms and ran in partisan elections.  
    • The governor could fill mid-term vacancies by appointment until the next election.  
    • This meant justices campaigned just like other politicians, seeking party backing, raising funds, and staking out positions. 

     2. Changes in 1950’s - 1956 Triple Play  


    • In the 1950s, Kansas Governor Fred Hall lost his bid for reelection in the 1956 GOP primary. Soon after, he orchestrated the infamous “Triple Play”: Hall resigned as governor, along with the current Chief Justice of the Kansas Supreme Court William Smith, and his lieutenant governor briefly became governor and appointed Hall to the Kansas Supreme Court. The move sparked public outrage over perceived political corruption, leading the Kansas Legislature to propose, and voters to approve in 1958, a constitutional amendment creating the bar controlled judicial nominating commission still in use today.  
    • 1958 Constitutional Amendment: The Merit Plan: In 1958, Kansas voters approved an amendment to the state constitution that replaced the election of Supreme Court justices with what was then referred to a "merit selection system" (referred to as the “Missouri Plan”). 

     3. Potential change in 2026  


    • The potential change proposed by the legislature would return Kansas to a judicial selection method similar to that of the early days of Kansas without the loophole that was exploited in the Triple Play, though the exact details will be determined by the legislature.

  • 3. Current Judicial Selection Process

     1. The current process to fill a vacancy:  


    • When a vacancy occurs on the Kansas Supreme Court, the Supreme Court Nominating Commission selects three nominees from the pool of applicants.  
    • The Governor must choose one of the three nominees within 60 days. If the Governor declines, the Chief Justice of the Kansas Supreme Court then makes the appointment. 
    • The Justices face a retention election after their first year, then again every 6 years.

     2. The Supreme Court Nominating Commission:  


    • A nine-member commission made of up 5 attorneys and 4 gubernatorial appointees whose job it is to evaluate applicants for vacant seats on the Supreme Court. 
    • The five attorneys are elected by members of the Kansas Bar Association, and serve 4 year terms. One is elected from each of the congressional districts, and the Chairman of the Commission is selected in a statewide election. 
    • The four gubernatorial appointees are selected by the governor to serve a four year term within ten days of a vacancy occurring on the Commission.

    3. 

  • 4. Proposed Judicial Selection Model

     1. Kansans would elect their Supreme Court Justices.  


    • Supreme Court candidates face an opponent in direct elections and serve six-year terms. 
    • The nine-member Supreme Court Nominating Commission would be abolished. 
    • Judicial candidates could campaign publicly, share their views with voters, and be held to the same transparency and disclosure requirements as other elected officials.  
    • The initial elections would be staggered so that not all seven seats appear on the ballot at once.  
    • Any interim vacancies would be filled through an election process established by the Legislature.

     2. Election Schedule:  


    According to the non-partisan Kansas Legislative Research, the proposed schedule for  the election of Kansas' Supreme Court Justices is as follows:


    • Positions 1, 2, and 3: Elected in 2028 
    • Positions 4 and 5: Elected in 2030 
    • Positions 6 and 7: Elected in 2032 
    • Thereafter, each position will appear on the ballot every six years.

  • 5. Nationwide Comparison of Judicial Selection Methods

     1. Here's a link to Ballotpedia and the Brennan Center's interactive map:  

    • Brennan Center: https://www.brennancenter.org/judicial-selection-map 
    • Ballotpedia: https://ballotpedia.org/State_supreme_courts

     2. How many states use each model:  

    • Bar-controlled assisted appointment: 1
    • Governor-controlled assisted appointment: 10
    • Hybrid-model assisted appointment: 10
    • Partisan Elections: 8
    • Nonpartisan Elections: 13
    • Hybrid: 4
    • Legislative Election: 2 
    • Gubernatorial appointment: 5
    • Michigan method: 1

Summary

Kansans will decide to keep or change the Supreme Court Justice nomination / selection process in August 2026.
A constitutional amendment will be placed before voters giving Kansans the opportunity to decide whether to keep the current bar-controlled nomination process, or return to direct elections.


Kansas started with a popular vote selection process in 1861. In 1958 the constitution was changed to give the bar association the majority of the members on a nominating committee which selects 3 candidates from whom the Governor must choose one. Kansas is the only state which has a bar controlled nominating commission and has no options for other candidates to be considered.


This debate has been building for years, with supporters arguing that voters deserve a direct say in who serves on the Supreme Court, while opponents warn that attorneys are best qualified to keep politics out of the courtroom. The outcome of this vote will shape the future of Kansas courts for decades to come.

Comparison: Current v. Proposed

CURRENT PROCESS


Bar-Controlled Selection


How It Works:


Filling a Vacancy on the KS Supreme Court: When a vacancy occurs, the nine-member Kansas Supreme Court Nominating Commission receives applications to fill the vacancy.

Nomination of three candidates: After reviewing the applicants, the commission submits three candidates to the Governor.

Final Selection: The Governor must select one of the three within 60 days. If the Governor declines, the Chief Justice makes the appointment.

Retention Elections: After serving one year, justices face a statewide yes/no retention vote, and then again every six years

PROPOSED PROCESS


Return to Direct Elections


How It Would Work:


Filling a Vacancy on the KS Supreme Court: When a vacancy occurs, Kansans would vote directly for a new Supreme Court justices on the ballot, similar to other elections.

No Commission: The nine-member nominating commission would be eliminated.

Candidate Campaigning: Candidates could campaign for votes and be subject to public disclosure rules.

Staggered Terms: Justices would continue to serve six-year terms, but elections would be staggered so that not all seven justices are on the ballot at once.

Vacancies: Interim vacancies would be filled through an election process established by lawmakers.

FAQs

  • How are Supreme Court Justices Selected in Kansas?

    When a vacancy occurs on the Kansas Supreme Court, a nine-member nominating commission selects three finalists from a pool of applicants. The commission includes five attorneys elected by the Kansas Bar Association and four non-attorneys appointed by the Governor. [1]


    The Governor must choose one of the three nominees. If the Governor declines, the Chief Justice of the Kansas Supreme Court makes the appointment. [2]

  • How many other states have this model?

     According to the non-partisan Ballotpedia, Kansas is the only state that uses a bar-controlled commission—where attorneys elected by the state bar hold a majority of seats—to select Supreme Court nominees. [3]

     

    However, 20 other states use some form of a nominating commission in their selection process. These commissions vary:

    10 states have governor-controlled commissions

    12 states use hybrid commissions with no single group in control 


  • What is the most common selection method for State Supreme Court Justices in the United States?

    The most common method is election.

    • 13 states use nonpartisan elections.
    • 8 states use partisan elections.

  • What do supporters of the way Kansas Supreme Court Justices are chosen say?

    Supporters of the current model, which they refer to as “merit selection” argue that lawyers are best equipped to select members to the State’s Highest Court. [4] They also contend that the nomination committee helps insulate justices from political influence, allowing decisions to be based on law rather than politics.[5]

  • What do critics of the way Kansas Supreme Court Justices are chosen say?

    Critics argue that the current system is “undemocratic” because it gives members of the state bar disproportionate influence over the nomination process. They note that Kansas is an outlier in having a “bar-controlled commission”, noting that lawyers make up just 0.03% of the state’s population, yet have the ability to effectively shape an entire branch of the state’s government. [6]

Sources

The Amendment

The measure would amend sections 5, 8, and 15 of Article 3 of the state constitution. The following underlined text would be added, and struck-through text would be deleted:


§ 5. Selection of justices of the supreme court. The citizens of Kansas who are qualified electors shall have the right to elect the justices of the supreme court. The rules applicable for such elections and the designation of position numbers shall be provided by law. Justice positions 1, 2 and 3 shall be elected at the general election in November of 2028, justice positions 4 and 5 in November of 2030 and justice positions 6 and 7 in November of 2032, and every six years thereafter, respectively. Any vacancy occurring on the supreme court for an unexpired term shall be filled at the next even-year election for the remainder of such term by election as provided by law. (a) Any vacancy occurring in the office of any justice of the supreme court and any position to be open thereon as a result of enlargement of the court, or the retirement or failure of an incumbent to file his declaration of candidacy to succeed himself as hereinafter required, or failure of a justice to be elected to succeed himself, shall be filled by appointment by the governor of one of three persons possessing the qualifications of office who shall be nominated and whose names shall be submitted to the governor by the supreme court nominating commission established as hereinafter provided.


(b) In event of the failure of the governor to make the appointment within sixty days from the time the names of the nominees are submitted to him, the chief justice of the supreme court shall make the appointment from such nominees. (c) Each justice of the supreme court appointed pursuant to provisions of subsection (a) of this section shall hold office for an initial term ending on the second Monday in January following the first general election that occurs after the expiration of twelve months in office. Not less than sixty days prior to the holding of the general election next preceding the expiration of his term of office, any justice of the supreme court may file in the office of the secretary of state a declaration of candidacy for election to succeed himself. If a declaration is not so filed, the position held by such justice shall be open from the expiration of his term of office. If such declaration is filed, his name shall be submitted at the next general election to the electors of the state on a separate judicial ballot, without party designation, reading substantially as follows:


"Shall _____________________________________________ (Here insert name of justice.) ___________________________________________________ (Here insert the title of the court.)


be retained in office?"


If a majority of those voting on the question vote against retaining him in office, the position or office which he holds shall be open upon the expiration of his term of office; otherwise he shall, unless removed for cause, remain in office for the regular term of six years from the second Monday in January following such election. At the expiration of each term he shall, unless by law he is compelled to retire, be eligible for retention in office by election in the manner prescribed in this section.


(d) A nonpartisan nominating commission whose duty it shall be to nominate and submit to the governor the names of persons for appointment to fill vacancies in the office of any justice of the supreme court is hereby established, and shall be known as the "supreme court nominating commission." Said commission shall be organized as hereinafter provided.


(e) The supreme court nominating commission shall be composed as follows: One member, who shall be chairman, chosen from among their number by the members of the bar who are residents of and licensed in Kansas; one member from each congressional district chosen from among their number by the resident members of the bar in each such district; and one member, who is not a lawyer, from each congressional district, appointed by the governor from among the residents of each such district.


(f) The terms of office, the procedure for selection and certification of the members of the commission and provision for their compensation or expenses shall be as provided by the legislature.


(g) No member of the supreme court nominating commission shall, while he is a member, hold any other public office by appointment or any official position in a political party or for six months thereafter be eligible for nomination for the office of justice of the supreme court. The commission may act only by the concurrence of a majority of its members.


§ 8. Prohibition of political activity by justices and certain judges. No justice of the supreme court who is appointed or retained under the procedure of section 5 of this article, nor any judge of the district court holding office under a nonpartisan method authorized in subsection (a) of section 6 of this article, shall directly or indirectly make any contribution to or hold any office in a political party or organization or take part in any political campaign, except when such judge is a candidate for election to a position on an appellate court.


§ 15. Removal of justices and judges. Justices of the supreme court may be removed from office by impeachment and conviction as prescribed in article 2 of this constitution. In addition to removal by impeachment and conviction, justices may be retired after appropriate hearing, upon certification to the governor, by the supreme court nominating commission that such justice is so incapacitated as to be unable to perform adequately his duties. Other judges shall be subject to retirement for incapacity, and to discipline, suspension and removal for cause by the supreme court after appropriate hearing.