Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
IT'S BEEN TRADITIONAL IN KANSAS FOR THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF
THE KANSAS SUPREME COURT TO ADDRESS A JOINT SESSION OF THE LEGISLATURE IN MAKING THE ANNUAL
STATE OF THE JUDICIARY SPEECH, BUT NOT THIS YEAR. JUSTICE LAWTON NUSS HAS BEEN
REBUFFED AND TOLD BY THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE THERE
IS SIMPLY NO TIME FOR HIM TO MAKE ANY REMARKS
AND INSTEAD TO PUT HIS WORDS IN WRITING. THE TURN OF EVENTS HAS BEEN
VIEWED AS A MAJOR SLIGHT OF THE JUDICIARY BY THE CONSERVATIVE TILTING LEGISLATURE, WHICH IS
EXPECTED TO TAKE UP WITHIN WEEKS A BILL TO CHANGE
THE WAY HIGHER COURT JUSTICES ARE SELECTED.
THE MOVE WOULD REVERSE A DECADES OLD NOMINATING SYSTEM IN FAVOR OF ONE IN WHICH THE GOVERNOR
WOULD GET TO HAND PICK A CANDIDATE AND THEN HAVE HIS CHOICE CONFIRMED BY THE SENATE.
CAN ANYONE AROUND THIS TABLE TELL ME WHAT IS BEHIND THIS TENSION?
HOW JUVENILE. I DIDN'T SEE THAT IN MY NOTES, BUT THANK YOU, MARY.
NOT LETTING HIM SPEAK. COME ON. EVERYBODY KNOWS THERE IS THIS
WITH HUGE TENSION BEHIND DEALING WITH THE ACTIVIST JUDGES AND THE SYSTEM.
YOU CAN ALWAYS LOOK AT THE SYSTEM OF HOW JUDGES ARE PUT INTO PLACE, BUT TO NOT LET HIM
EVEN SPEAK, IT'S LIKE, COME ON, GROW UP, DEAL WITH THE OTHER ISSUES IN A MORE MATURE MANNER.
BUT THE HOUSE SPEAKER HAS SAID LAWMAKERS HAVE COME TO HIM AND SAID THE SPEECH WAS VERY
BORING OVER THE YEARS. WELL, THERE ARE A LOT OF BORING THINGS IN THES WILL OF --
IN THE KANSAS LEGISLATURE. NICK, THERE IS A LOT OF TENSION BETWEEN THE JUDICIARY IN
KANSAS AND LAWMAKERS. IT GOES BACK TO 2005 WHEN THE STATE SUPREME COURT ORDERED THE
SPENDING OF TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON THE SCHOOL FUNDING FORMULA.
LAWMAKERS THOUGHT THAT WAS A DIRECT IMPOSITION ON THE WORK THAT THEY DO WITH ACTIVIST
JUDGES. JUST A YEAR AGO, THERE WAS A BUDGET FIGHT WITH THE COURTS.
THE COURT SHUT DOWN FOR A DAY IN A VERY DRAMATIC GESTURE, SORT OF PROTESTED AGAINST WHAT THE
LEGISLATURE WAS DOING. THE LEGISLATURE DIDN'T TAKE KINDLY TO THAT EITHER.
AND NOW WE HAVE THIS FIGHT OVER HOW JUDGES ARE PICKED. YOU COULD ONLY BEGIN TO SEE HERE
WHAT'S GOING ON. A LOT OF TENSION IN KANSAS GOING ON OVER THIS.
SO THE PLAN IS TO ALLOW THE GOVERNOR, THEN, JUST LIKE THE FEDERAL SYSTEM, WHERE THE
PRESIDENT GETS TO PICK THE PERSON HE WANTS TO BE A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, AND THEN THE
SENATE CONFIRMS THAT PERSON. WHAT IS WRONG THEN IN A SYSTEM IN KANSAS THEN, SAM ZEFF, WHERE
THE GOVERNOR WOULD GET TO PICK WHO THE JUDGE ON
THE COURT OF APPEALS OR SUPREME COURT AND THE
SENATE WOULD CONFIRM. IF. OPPONENTS WOULD SAY THERE'S
PRACTICAL POLITICS INVOLVED, THAT IN FACT,
GOVERNOR BROWNBACK JUST WANTS TO GET HIS PEOPLE ON
THE COURT OF APPEALS. ON THE SUPREME COURT, A LITTLE HARDER TO DO, AND THEN AT THE
SENATE, AS OPPOSED TO ADVISING AND CONSENT, WOULD BE RUBBER STAMPING.
THAT'S WHAT OPPONENTS FEAR, THAT THIS IS A POWER
GRAB BY GOVERNOR BROWNBACK TO CONTROL THE APPEALS
COURT IN KANSAS ULTIMATELY BECAUSE OF SCHOOL FUNDING. AND IF I CAN JUST -- JUST
ANOTHER SECOND, THIS LEGISLATION IS ON A ROCKET SLED. THERE'S ALREADY A BILL PREFILED
YESTERDAY. SENATOR JEFF KING FROM INDEPENDENCE.
AND THEY'VE MODIFIED THEIR PROPOSAL A LITTLE BIT. THE ORIGINAL LEGISLATION LAST
YEAR WHICH DECIDED IN THE SENATE SAID THE GOVERNOR APPOINTS THE SENATE, WOULD THEN CONFIRM.
THIS BILL IN THE SENATE WOULD GIVE YOU SORT OF A MIDDLE GROUND.
SO THE GOVERNOR WOULD MAKE HIS APPOINTMENT. IT WOULD GO TO A COMMITTEE THAT
HAD VARIOUS APPOINTMENTS ON IT. THEY WOULD VET IT IN SOME WAY, WHICH IS NOT SPECIFIED.
THEN IT WOULD GO TO THE SENATE WHERE THEY WOULD CONFIRM. SO IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE TRYING
TO PUT A LITTLE POLITICAL COVER IN THIS BETWEEN THE GOVERNOR AND THE CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN
SENATE IN KANSAS. BUT YOU SAID THIS IS ON A ROCKET SLED, SO THIS IS MOVING
VERY, VERY QUICKLY. WOULD THESE CHANGES, THOUGH, REQUIRE, THOUGH, A VOTE OF THE
PEOPLE OR COULD THE LEGISLATURE UNILATERALLY DECIDE
THIS AND THE VOTERS WOULD BE KEPT OUT OF THE
EQUATION ALTOGETHER? THEY'VE CHANGED THE SELECTION FORMULA FOR THE APPELLATE COURT
THROUGH STATE LAW. WITH THE STATE SUPREME COURT, IT WOULD REQUIRE A CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT AND PEOPLE VOTING. BUT, AS SOME SUGGESTED, REALLY ABOUT EDUCATION?
YES, YES. ULTIMATELY IT'S ABOUT THE CASE THAT STEVE REFERRED TO BACK IN
2005 WHERE THE COURT IN ESSENCE REALLY INCREASED FUNDING FOR SCHOOLS.
SAM BROWNBACK'S BUDGET WILL NOT WORK UNLESS HE CAN GET A COMPLIANT COURT SYSTEM TO AGREE
WITH THE CUTS THAT ALMOST CERTAINLY ARE GOING TO COME. THAT MAY BE SOME OF THE
IMPETUS AND SOME OF THE MOVEMENT BEHIND IT, BUT
IT'S ABOUT EVERY OTHER SORT OF CASE, ABORTION,
MANY OTHER ISSUES, REVIEWING THE APPELLATE COURT. THIS, AS WELL AS OTHER
ISSUES, WE'LL CONTINUE TO FOLLOW HERE.