State Supreme Courts ideological breakdown

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Blue = liberal
Red = conservative
Purple = moderate
Grey = vacant

[windjammer]

I believe there is an another dem justice in VA

[Gass3268]

These state supreme courts should be heavily employed to prevent Republican gerrymandering. Especially in Arkansas, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, etc.

[lfromnj]

I actually read that the GOP can flip the IL state SCOTUS coz its based on district and we all know how bad the IL D's are self packed in clean districts

[JerryArkansas]

I actually read that the GOP can flip the IL state SCOTUS coz its based on district and we all know how bad the IL D's are self packed in clean districts

Its more that the map currently is gerrymandered to favour them.

[Skill and Chance]

2 of the Republican appointees should clearly count as moderates in Michigan.

https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/07/michigan-supreme-court-election-results/1896783002/

https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-government/michigans-republican-black-sheep-justice-winning-some-unlikely-allies

"Meanwhile, a Supreme Court term was underway, during which she joined in decisions with fellow Republican-nominated Justice David Viviano and two Democratic-nominated justices, Bridget McCormack and Richard Bernstein, on most of the court’s major opinions that term."

There were major 4/3 rulings upholding a gun control law and the redistricting commission ballot referendum where Clement and Viviano joined the 2 Dem appointees (2 at that time, a 3rd Dem unseated one of the other 2 more hardline Republican justices last November).  The GOP explicitly disowned Justice Clement in her reelection campaign (which she won), so she is essentially an independent now.   

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I actually read that the GOP can flip the IL state SCOTUS coz its based on district and we all know how bad the IL D's are self packed in clean districts

The Cook County district elects three. So the Democrats only need the northern Illinois district with DuPage, Lake and Kane included for a majority and we all know how those areas vote now. Pritzker won it in addition to Hillary winning it big.

[Skill and Chance]

I actually read that the GOP can flip the IL state SCOTUS coz its based on district and we all know how bad the IL D's are self packed in clean districts

The Cook County district elects three. So the Democrats only need the northern Illinois district with DuPage, Lake and Kane included for a majority and we all know how those areas vote now. Pritzker won it in addition to Hillary winning it big.

That is just a bizarre system.  Why not just have statewide elections?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I disagree with the categorization of the Minnesota Chief Justice (Lorie Skjerven Gildea) as a moderate by the way. She was appointed twice by Pawlenty (once as Associate Justice and then as Chief) and outside of no brainer rulings that are unanimous she rules the right wing position about 90% of the time.

Her "moderate" reputation is probably based on that her only opponents have been fundamentalist nutjobs, leaving her as the relatively liberal candidate in the race. I voted for her in 2008 and 2012 for that reason, in 2018 when she was unopposed I wrote in Brian Krassenstein.

[Storr]

Blue = liberal
Red = conservative
Purple = moderate
Grey = vacant

Missouri, Kansas, and Oklahoma are surprises (North Carolina would be surprising to most people as well, but as a resident I'm familiar with the liberal leanings of our supreme court). Is there any specific reason these three traditionally conservative state have supreme courts with liberal majorities?

[Skill and Chance]

Blue = liberal
Red = conservative
Purple = moderate
Grey = vacant

Missouri, Kansas, and Oklahoma are surprises (North Carolina would be surprising to most people as well, but as a resident I'm familiar with the liberal leanings of our supreme court). Is there any specific reason these three traditionally conservative state have supreme courts with liberal majorities?

Obvious explanations based on party background:

KS: Sebelius got to appoint a majority of the court during her 2 terms as governor. 

MO: Of the current 7 justices, 2 were appointed by Dem governor Jay Nixon and 2 by Dem governor Bob Holden (served from 2001-2005).

OK: The last Dem governor, Brad Henry, got to appoint 4 of the 9 seats and there is a justice still serving who was appointed by Dem governor George Nigh back in 1984. 

TN being only 3/2 surprised me, but that is also straightforward as the 2 left leaning justices are both Bredesen appointees.

More complicated:

AR: Most of the current justices were elected to the court in nonpartisan elections rather than being appointed.  Many defeated incumbents in their first election.  I guess this format encourages moderation when the nonpartisan elections are vigorously contested?

KY: They are elected to the court in partisan elections and the governor gets to initially fill vacancies.  5 of the 7 are Republicans.  I guess 2 of the Republicans are just known to have moderate tendencies?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Blue = liberal
Red = conservative
Purple = moderate
Grey = vacant

Missouri, Kansas, and Oklahoma are surprises (North Carolina would be surprising to most people as well, but as a resident I'm familiar with the liberal leanings of our supreme court). Is there any specific reason these three traditionally conservative state have supreme courts with liberal majorities?

Missouri's been under a Democratic Governor for 12 years since 2001 and there's four D Governor appointments. Kansas apparently still has a Sebelius-appointed majority. Similar situation in Oklahoma, Brad Henry (Democratic Governor from 2003-2011) appointed four of them, and a fifth is an ancient one appointed by Democratic Governor George Nigh all the way back in 1984.

[Skill and Chance]

Also, surprising CA is only 4D/3R.

[lfromnj]

I thought Kansas was Sebellius + rinos?

[libertpaulian]

Also, surprising CA is only 4D/3R.

Probably Ahhnold appointees.

[Skill and Chance]

I thought Kansas was Sebellius + rinos?

Sebelius appointed 4 of 7, but there are also 2 Republican appointees who were liberal enough to join the state level right to abortion decision earlier this year.  It was 6/1.

[lfromnj]

I thought Kansas was Sebellius + rinos?

Sebelius appointed 4 of 7, but there are also 2 Republican appointees who were liberal enough to join the state level right to abortion decision earlier this year.  It was 6/1.

Ah thx. Yeah Kansas should definitely have those 2 flipped and FL too.

[libertpaulian]

AR, KY, KS, and OK should utilize the power of their state supreme courts to reverse gerrymandering, no?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AR, KY, KS, and OK should utilize the power of their state supreme courts to reverse gerrymandering, no?

There isn't much gerrymandering those states. KY-06 was already drawn to be somewhat more Democratic than it otherwise would have been.

Arkansas was drawn by Democrats.

You could make a case for Kansas-03. I think the courts drew Kansas anyway because the KS GOP was too busing fighting themselves to pass a map.

[Bojack Horseman]

Michigan’s Supreme Court will flip next year, as a Republican justice is about to age out and the Dem will probably win the seat.

[Ebsy]

Shouldn't Wisconsin be 5-2?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Shouldn't Wisconsin be 5-2?

The guy who made it said he started before the most recent justice took office. It would be now.

[TDAS04]

Blue = liberal
Red = conservative
Purple = moderate
Grey = vacant

Missouri, Kansas, and Oklahoma are surprises (North Carolina would be surprising to most people as well, but as a resident I'm familiar with the liberal leanings of our supreme court). Is there any specific reason these three traditionally conservative state have supreme courts with liberal majorities?

I know your state hasn’t had many Republican governors. 

[politicallefty]

Also, surprising CA is only 4D/3R.

Probably Ahhnold appointees.

Republicans controlled the governorship in California for almost 23.5 years out of 28 years from 1983-2011. Also, in 1986, there was a successful effort by the right to remove 3 liberal Justices from the California Supreme Court that were replaced by "law and order, pro-business" conservatives.

One of the more surprising results from 2018 was Ohio. Democrats gained 2 seats on the Ohio Supreme Court in what are technically nonpartisan elections. If Democrats can pull that off again next year, they'd have a majority on the Court, which could have very serious implications when it comes to the new redistricting regime that was set up last year.

[smoltchanov]

2 of the Republican appointees should clearly count as moderates in Michigan.

https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/07/michigan-supreme-court-election-results/1896783002/

https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-government/michigans-republican-black-sheep-justice-winning-some-unlikely-allies

"Meanwhile, a Supreme Court term was underway, during which she joined in decisions with fellow Republican-nominated Justice David Viviano and two Democratic-nominated justices, Bridget McCormack and Richard Bernstein, on most of the court’s major opinions that term."

There were major 4/3 rulings upholding a gun control law and the redistricting commission ballot referendum where Clement and Viviano joined the 2 Dem appointees (2 at that time, a 3rd Dem unseated one of the other 2 more hardline Republican justices last November).  The GOP explicitly disowned Justice Clement in her reelection campaign (which she won), so she is essentially an independent now.   

May be - all Republican judges are authomatically marked as "conservative"?