Candidates file for judgeships; four primaries May 19

The filing deadline for this year's judicial elections in Kentucky passed Jan. 9, creating four primary elections on May 19, and candidates drew for ballot positions yesterday. Primaries are held when more than two candidates file for the same office, with the two top vote-getters advancing to the general election. Judicial elections in Kentucky are nonpartisan.

Here are the primary elections for judgeships, with candidates listed by ballot position:

• 6th District (Daviess County), Division 1: J. Nick Payne, William C. Mattingly, W. Russell Duty and Lelah Rogers.
• 22nd District (Lexington-Fayette), Division 2: Shannon Brooks, Alex Garcia and Aaron F. Fallahi.
• 25th District (Clark and Madison), Division 1: Micah Shwan Johnson of Berea, Darrian D. Botts of Richmond and Tyler S. Frazier of Richmond.
• 40th District (Clinton, Russell and Wayne), Division 2: Tom Simmons, Monticello; Lee Whittenburg, Monticello; Athena Cooper Bradshaw, Russell Springs.

Frazier, who was appointed to fill a vacancy in 2025, is the only incumbent in a primary. His opponents were the two other nominees for the seat. The other races are for seats being given up by incumbents.

All district judgeships are on the ballot this year. In addition to the four judgeships above, there will be at least nine contested general elections for District Court. They are in Hart and LaRue counties (10th District); Henry, Oldham and Trimble counties (12th); Carroll, Grant and Owen counties (15th); Harrison, Nicholas, Pendleton and Robertson counties (18th); the 6th Division seat in Jefferson County (30th); Floyd County (31st); Boyle and Mercer counties (50th) and Henderson County (51st District).

If vacancies occur, as is common, additional general elections would be held. 

The races for unexpired terms for circuit judgeships are in Boyle and Mercer counties, between Christopher Reed and appointed Judge Whitney Z. Johns; and for Family Court in Bullitt County, between Amanda Spalding and appointed Judge Monica Meredith.

The highest-level race this year is for the Court of Appeals seat vacated by the November 2024 election of Pamela Goodwine to the state Supreme Court. Lucy VanMeter opposes appointed Judge Will Moynahan; both are from Lexington. The only Supreme Court seat on the ballot is held by Chief Justice Debra Lambert, who drew no opponent.

Chief Justice Debra Lambert says being nonpartisan is 'foundational for judges in Kentucky'

Chief Justice Debra Lambert

Kentucky Chief Justice Debra Lambert appeared on “Kentucky Newsmakers” with Bill Bryant on WKYT-27 today. Some excerpts:

“That is foundational for judges in Kentucky, to be nonpartisan.”

“I don’t think the public knows enough about the judiciary but it’s not their fault. . . . Sometimes people don’t understand the limitations judges have when they review a case.”

Asked how difficult it is to run when you can’t tell voters how you will rule on cases, and how voters can know you will render quality service, Lambert said, “What people expect is an impartial judge, a judge that isn’t influenced by politics.” She said judicial campaigning is fun because you get to attend all events, including those of both parties.

Asked if she considers it odd for prosecutors and circuit clerks to be elected on partisan basis, she said, “I do, but I think it goes back to” negotiations on the Judicial Article of 1975, which created the Supreme Court and the District Court and abolished county and city courts.

Lambert said she will run for re-election next year in the Third District. That will be one of two Supreme Court races set for 2026; the other is in the Fifth District, where appointed Justice Pamela Goodwine is running for the remainder of the unexpired term of Laurence Van Meter, who resigned from the court last year when he was chief justice. His wife, Fayette Circuit Judge Lucy Van Meter, has filed for the seat. If no one else files, there will be no primary election; if there are more than two candidates, a primary will be held and the top two vote-getters will run off in the general election.

Committee voices concern over increasing partisanship in Supreme Court race in the Bluegrass region

The Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee, which has monitored campaigns in nonpartisan judicial elections for 18 years, is increasingly concerned that partisan politics are playing a role in this year’s only race for justice of the Supreme Court of Kentucky.

A mail piece endorsing Republican candidates and Erin Izzo

The committee’s concern increased this week when it learned that the county Republican organizations in five of the eight counties in the 5th Supreme Court District have endorsed candidate Erin Izzo, and that she has advertised those endorsements on her Facebook page. In addition to the endorsements from the Franklin, Bourbon, Jessamine, Madison and Clark county parties, Izzo also posted a thank-you to the Fayette County Republican Party “for sharing information about me and others running for office this November.” The post links to a page with a list of “Fayette County Republican Candidates,” beginning with Donald J. Trump and ending with Izzo and this label: “Kentucky Supreme Court (Nonpartisan).” Meanwhile, the committee has become aware of a mail piece saying “Your Frankfort County [sic] Republican Party endorses these candidates, including “Erin Izzo for Supreme Court” with no mention that the race is nonpartisan.

The 5th Supreme Court District is outlined.
(Image from Bourbon County Republican Party)

The Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee is a private, nonprofit, nonpartisan group organized to safeguard the integrity of the judiciary in Kentucky judicial elections, which are nonpartisan. We believe that judicial elections are different from other elections, for good reason, and should remain that way. We have previously expressed concerned about partisanship in judicial elections, including this one. On June 17, we told Izzo’s opponent, Court of Appeals Judge Pamela Goodwine, that if she mentioned her endorsement by Gov. Andy Beshear’s political action committee, that would violate the spirit of Section 117 of the Kentucky Constitution, which makes judicial elections nonpartisan. Goodwine’s Facebook page includes photos from a June 14 Democratic Party event that shows her getting applause while standing at Beshear’s table, and another sitting with him. His endorsement is implied. Since then, no posts have mentioned him, and an Aug. 20 post shows Goodwine attending the Fayette County Republican picnic.

The voters of Kentucky approved Section 117 of our constitution in 1975 to separate the judiciary from partisan politics. Maintaining that separation has long been a major interest of our committee, which is made up of Democrats, Republicans and independents. We believe that political parties and partisan politicians should not make endorsements in nonpartisan elections, and that nonpartisan candidates should not seek such endorsements – because they give voters the idea that judges are just like any other politicians and that their decisions will be influenced by politics. That undermines public confidence in the judiciary, which helps a democratic republic function properly. Those who hold and seek judicial office should avoid actions that undermine public confidence in those offices.

Committee expresses concern about Supreme Court candidate's use of governor's endorsement; she replies

The Committee delivered the following letter today to Court of Appeals Judge Pamela Goodwine, a candidate for the Kentucky Supreme Court.

Dear Judge Goodwine:

The Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee is a private, nonprofit, nonpartisan group organized to safeguard the integrity of the judiciary in Kentucky judicial elections. We believe judicial elections are different from other elections, for good reason, and should remain that way. We are concerned about the recent increase of partisanship in judicial elections, as evidenced by our public statements in 2022 about the Northern Kentucky race for the Supreme Court (published on our website, listed above).

We are likewise concerned that Gov. Andy Beshear’s political action committee has endorsed your candidacy for the Kentucky Supreme Court. He is Kentucky’s highest-ranking official who is elected on a partisan basis, and is widely known as a Democrat, so we believe that if you were to refer to his endorsement in your campaign, that would violate the spirit of Section 117 of the Kentucky Constitution, which makes judicial elections nonpartisan.

The intent of that section is to separate the judiciary from partisan politics, and maintaining that separation has long been a major interest of our Committee, which is made up of Democrats, Republicans and independents. We have expressed our concerns to the governor, and now we express them to you.

The Executive Branch often appears before the Kentucky Supreme Court. This could present an appearance of conflict, if not actual conflict, for any justice who was supported by the sitting governor. While a justice may recuse from a case, the governor appoints the temporary replacement justice. So, we think members of the Executive Branch, especially the governor, should not be involved in judicial elections.

Now that the governor is involved in your campaign, it is largely up to you what to make of his endorsement. While you certainly have every right to use it, we believe doing so would further blur the line between judicial and partisan elections, and have the effect of eroding public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary.

Our Committee may make a public statement on this matter, but before we do that, we would like to hear from you, either in writing, in person or an online meeting. 

The Committee received the following response from Judge Goodwine this evening:

Throughout my 25 years of dedicated service as a judge, I have earned respect from members of all political parties as well as a solid reputation for serving with the utmost honesty, integrity, ethics, impartiality, fairness and justice for all. I am committed to continuing to demonstrate these principles on the Kentucky Supreme Court and remaining unbiased in my decision making.

Having served as a judge for over two decades and as a candidate for the Kentucky Supreme Court, I take ethical considerations very seriously and take to heart the importance of maintaining impartiality and upholding the integrity of the judiciary. I have dedicated my life and career to serving with the highest ethical standards and base each of my judicial decisions on the law and the merits of each case. 

The voluntary endorsement of Governor Beshear is based upon my record of impartiality, fairness and justice. “The governor believes that judges should decide cases by the letter of the law and not by the letter of anyone’s party registration,” Eric Hyers reported on behalf of Governor Beshear earlier this year. 

The best and most qualified candidates receive endorsements from a wide array of individuals and organizations based upon their records of exemplary service and any person or organization could potentially be called before any member of the judiciary. 

My steadfast commitment to the nonpartisan nature of the judiciary is evidenced in my participation in events hosted by both Republicans and Democrats, including the Jessamine County Republican Women’s Club meeting, Fayette County Republican Party Reagan Day Dinner, Franklin County Democratic Executive Committee meeting, and the Forward Together Dinner where Governor Beshear said of the need for both parties to collaborate for the good of the Commonwealth “not left, not right, but forward together!”

Upon election to the Kentucky Supreme Court, I will continue to adhere to the highest ethical standards and, if faced with a situation where my impartiality was reasonably called into question, I would carefully consider the circumstances and if necessary recuse myself to ensure the integrity of the judicial process.

Committee elects new officers, recognizes past service

Howard Roberts, founding dean and professor emeritus of the business college at the University of Pikeville, was elected chair of the Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee at the committee's annual meeting Feb. 24.

Roberts had been vice chair of the committee. Elected to succeed him in that position was Kathy Walker of Prestonsburg. Charles Boteler of Louisville and Al Cross of Frankfort were re-elected treasurer and secretary, respectively.

The committee lauded outgoing chair Anthony Wilhoit for his service, which began as founding chair in 2005. It also noted the recent death of another founding member, William Fortune, law professor at the University of Kentucky, and his contributions to the committee, the legal profession and the public.

Meeting via Zoom, the committee reviewed the current judicial races and agreed to send its usual letters to the candidates asking them to sign a pledge regarding campaign conduct.

Committee becomes more concerned about partisanship in state Supreme Court race that is constitutionally nonpartisan

For more information, contact Vice Chair Howard Roberts at hroberts@upike.edu or Secretary Al Cross at al.cross@uky.edu.

The Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee, which in August warned about partisanship in nonpartisan judicial elections, is freshly concerned because a candidate for a state Supreme Court seat has scheduled a day-long tour with the congressman whose district includes the entire Supreme Court district.

State Rep. Joseph Fischer has announced that he and U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie will make four stops in the 6th Supreme Court district Thursday, Nov. 3. All but three of the counties that are entirely in Massie’s district are also in the district in which Fischer is running. That district comprises Boone, Bracken, Campbell, Carroll, Gallatin, Grant, Kenton, Oldham, Owen, Pendleton, Shelby and Trimble counties.

Fischer’s announcement includes his campaign logo that identifies him as “the conservative Republican.” That identification was one of the reasons that the Committee issued a statement Aug. 10 saying that while judicial candidates have the First Amendment right to publicize their political affiliations and their records in public service, Fischer was placing too much emphasis on his partisan affiliation. Now he is doubling down on that, publicizing an upcoming tour of the district with the Republican who has represented the area in Congress for nearly 10 years.

We believe this further undermines the independence and integrity of the judiciary, which are essential elements of the American system of government. Unfortunately, many voters do not realize that Kentucky’s judicial elections are nonpartisan. When judicial campaigning becomes partisan, it can mislead voters into thinking they are voting in a partisan election. The objective of a nonpartisan election is to separate the judiciary from political entanglements.

The Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee is a private, nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that was created to safeguard the integrity of the judiciary in Kentucky judicial elections. It was formed partly in response to court decisions that expanded the free-speech rights of judicial candidates, and the prospect of campaigns that would make nonpartisan judicial elections more like those for executive and legislative offices, which are mostly partisan.

The committee has focused its public statements on campaigns that used false or misleading information to persuade voters, and believes its work has discouraged such campaigning. Now it voices concern about partisanship, out of fear that this trend will undermine the independence of the judiciary, and thus undermine its integrity. Citizens should be able to expect their disputes that end up in court will be decided by an impartial tribunal that is not influenced by political affiliations.

One of our members, retired Supreme Court Justice Bill Cunningham, warned voters this summer that partisan campaigning for judicial seats “should put the voter on notice that there is a political group of people who have an interest in having one of their own as your judge.” We believe that when judicial candidates emphasize their affiliation with a political party, they erode long-held American principles of judicial independence and fairness. Politics is a necessary aspect of our system of government, but there’s a reason judicial elections are nonpartisan. Justice shouldn’t be political.

Committee makes statement regarding a complaint

The Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee has issued the following statement.

This matter came before the committee as the result of a letter from Joe Bilby, a candidate for Franklin County circuit judge. Mr. Bilby alleges that incumbent Judge Phillip Shepherd stated in an advertisement that he would not accept political contributions from any political party or any elected official or their political action committees. Mr. Bilby states that Shepherd has in fact accepted contributions from “numerous” politicians “who do not hold office at the moment” and “at least one political candidate who is running for a partisan office in 2022.”

Judge Shepherd responds that he has received “over 1,100” donations to his campaign and that he works hard to identify contributions from political parties or elected officials and returns those, so identified, to the donors. He stated that he had overlooked the two contributions cited by Bilby, which were from “out of towners” who were not identified “in our review process.” He has now refunded those contributions.

Under the circumstances, it does not appear that Judge Shepherd’s advertisement is either false or misleading. Therefore, all concur that no further action by the committee is warranted.

Anthony M. Wilhoit
Chair