Opponents of Kansas judicial selection amendment have faced intimidation, gaslighting

An insular gang of rightwing reactionaries has spent the better part of two years rigging the judicial selection amendment vote.

Whether the measure succeeds or fails Tuesday, the playing field was tilted against opponents from the start. Supporters have manipulated the system at every step to suppress voter turnout, silence advocates and spread misleading rhetoric.

Kansans overwhelmingly support abortion rights and strong public schools. They have been gaslit by elected officials from gerrymandered legislative districts who seek the eradication of both.

The contest was never remotely fair.

But then, it wasn’t meant to be.

Kansas Reflector video

Let’s begin with the fact that the amendment has reached ballots at all. Kansans already have a say at the polls for every single state Supreme Court justice via retention votes. Republican leaders have already attempted to oust justices they didn’t like, most recently in 2016. They didn’t succeed.

But the failure of the “Value Them Both” anti-abortion amendment in 2022 motivated Attorney General Kris Kobach and anti-abortion extremists to take another whack at the high court. Less than two months after the 2022 vote, Kobach said that a judicial selection amendment was another way to achieve the same goal: banning abortion.

When Kansas legislators sent the amendment to voters, they purposefully chose a primary election in a midterm year. Given GOP dominance in the state, Democrats and independents turn out less frequently for primaries. Amendment backers wanted to choose their voters rather than have the largest number of Kansans take part. (They tried the same tactic in 2022 but were caught flat-footed by the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade.)

Let’s dwell on that point for a moment: Lawmakers claiming that voters need a voice chose to engage the fewest voters possible.

The ballot language itself offers a slanted take on the amendment. Read the “explanatory text” on the Secretary of State’s website and tell me with a straight face that the people who wrote it don’t want you to vote in a specific way.

While not inaccurate per se, the amendment description focuses on the membership of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission, as through the inclusion of lawyers — who by definition know a lot about law — harms its work. It also entirely omits discussion of how the amendment might be implemented, handwaving such discussions with the airy phrase “as provided by law.”

The list goes on. Supporters didn’t think the table had been tilted quite enough.

Rep. Pat Proctor, the Leavenworth Republican who is running for secretary of state, shepherded a bill into law last year that restricted funds from “foreign nationals” in amendment campaigns. Rhetoric at the time and a subsequent court challenge made clear that the law was meant to silence opponents to this constitutional amendment.

Regardless, scads of dark money have flowed into the amendment fight this year, with much coming from the conservative side. The Wichita Eagle’s Chance Swaim listed five such groups in a story last week. They have spent millions of dollars to shape public opinion, yet disclosed precious little information about their donors.

I contributed to this coverage in my own way a couple of weeks ago, examining the origins of the “Kansas Information Network” website. Rest assured, that’s only one slice of a stomach-churning pie.

Meanwhile, voting officials have hardly covered themselves in glory. Johnson County closed eight early voting sites in urban areas (think progressive) while opening two new ones in far-flung towns  (think conservative). Just last week, voters and candidates protested after Wyandotte County mail ballots were returned because of an incorrect return address printed on envelopes.

I’m not saying there’s a conspiracy to prevent amendment opponents from casting their votes, but one can’t help but notice that progressive bastions feel the brunt of such changes.

Finally, on Thursday the Kansas Supreme Court stepped in to make sure further voting restrictions weren’t leveled at the last minute. If that court was constituted different, members might well have decided to make it even more difficult to cast a ballot.

Kansans will have their say Tuesday.

I don’t know what will happen. Come Wednesday, pundits will retroactively explain why the outcome that occurred was the only one possible. All I can say at present is that a cabal of right-wingers in Kansas government went above and beyond common decency in trying to rig amendment results — before a single vote was cast.

In a just world, they would feel some sort of shame for attempting to sway the outcome so blatantly. In this real world, I expect they’ll try more of the same in elections to come.

Clay Wirestone is Kansas Reflector opinion editor. Through its opinion section, Kansas Reflector works to amplify the voices of people who are affected by public policies or excluded from public debate. Find information, including how to submit your own commentary, here.