The Kentucky Supreme Court contest to replace retiring Chief Justice Laurance B. VanMeter is in some ways a typical nonpartisan judicial race, where two candidates contrast their legal experience and judicial philosophies in speeches and campaign websites.
But in other ways, it is the new normal for Kentucky — continuing the very recent trend of partisan endorsements and big-spending political action committees seeking to influence a race for a seat on Kentucky’s highest court.
An independent judicial watchdog group has criticized both candidates in the race for either accepting or touting partisan endorsements, saying this could undermine the public’s confidence in the independence of the judiciary — just as it did in another high-profile Supreme Court race from 2022.
The race for the court’s Fifth District in eight central Kentucky counties pits Court of Appeals Judge Pamela Goodwine against Frankfort attorney Erin Izzo.
In Izzo’s corner: endorsements that she touts from six local Republican parties and a quasi-endorsement from anti-abortion advocacy group Kentucky Right to Life
In Goodwine’s corner: The backing of Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear and at least one PAC funded by teacher unions that is set to spend half a million dollars to elect her.
The most lopsided aspect of the race is money. Not only has Goodwine’s general election campaign raised $270,000 more than Izzo, but including the PACs supporting her there will be well more than $800,000 of spending on her behalf, 16 times that of Izzo.
While both candidates have been hesitant to reveal their personal views on abortion — a hot topic of judicial importance since Kentucky’s near-total ban went into effect two years ago — opposing groups focused on this issue have taken sides.
Right To Life supports Izzo, while Planned Parenthood of Kentucky has paid for ads highlighting Izzo’s praise of the U.S. Supreme Court decision that outlawed abortion in Kentucky.
With the high court likely to weigh in on issues like abortion rights and school funding in the coming years, opposing interest groups and parties see a chance to shift the ideological balance of the court. The retiring VanMeter is thought of as a relative centrist, though graded as Republican-leaning by a nationwide analysis of supreme court justices by Ballotpedia.
Touting partisan endorsements and independence
The presence of partisanship and big-spending PACs in the race has drawn comparisons to the 2022 race for Supreme Court in the northern Kentucky district between Justice Michelle Keller and former GOP lawmaker Joe Fischer. Outside PACs — including one entirely funded by a national GOP group — spent more than $350,000 on ads for each candidate, while Fischer’s campaign openly touted himself as “the conservative Republican” candidate.
One independent judicial watchdog group that criticized the partisan nature of that 2022 race has leveled critiques again this year at both Supreme Court candidates.
The Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee in June sent an open letter to Goodwine urging her not to tout the endorsement of Beshear. Noting that the governor and executive branch often have cases before the Supreme Court, the committee wrote that Beshear’s endorsement could “have the effect of eroding public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary.”
Though Izzo later jabbed Goodwine over being “admonished” by the committee, she herself drew criticism from the group in the past week.
Thursday, the Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee voiced concern that Izzo’s campaign Facebook page has touted endorsements she received from the local Republican parties of Madison, Bourbon, Franklin, Jessamine, Clark and Fayette counties.
“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,” the committee wrote. “That undermines public confidence in the judiciary, which helps a democratic republic function properly.”
The group also noted that while Goodwine’s Facebook page had previously posted photos from a Democratic Party fundraiser in June that shows her receiving applause while standing at Beshear’s table, no posts have mentioned him since then.
In addition to an endorsement from Beshear and $2,100 contribution from his leadership PAC, Goodwine has benefited from the Liberty & Justice for Kentucky PAC, which reported raising $495,000 as of last week — $300,000 of which was from the statewide and Louisville teachers unions.
In her criticism of the pro-Goodwine PAC receiving $200,000 from the Jefferson County Teachers Association in September, Izzo said Kentuckians “deserve a Supreme Court that is independent, not one acting as a rubber stamp for a left wing SuperPAC and the Teachers’ Unions.”
Liberty & Justice for Kentucky has already spent most of its funds on TV and digital ads that tout her as a “registered independent,” a message matching the ads of Goodwine’s campaign and another Beshear-linked PAC. Records from the Kentucky Secretary of State’s Office show that Goodwine is registered as an independent and Izzo is a registered Republican, as is the outgoing VanMeter.
Similar messaging is in political mailers sent by Kentuckians for Good Judges, a PAC that is chaired by Eric Hyers, the top political strategist of Beshear. The mailers state Goodwine is needed to “keep politics out of the courtroom” and is “fair, impartial and unbiased.”
Because it entered the race so late, Kentuckians for Good Judges will not have to report who funded it or how much it spent until after the election.
Responding to the Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee in June, Goodwine wrote that she 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.”
Izzo thanked each local Republican Party for their endorsement on her campaign Facebook page. She posted a screenshot of the Bourbon County GOP’s post that she “is a constitutionalist, which is the backbone of the party.” The county GOP added that Izzo is against “a longtime far-left leaning incumbent,” making it “imperative that we band together as a party” and support Izzo’s campaign.
Along with the screenshot, Izzo thanked the party for the endorsement, adding: “It takes a village! As a constitutionalist, I hold our rights and liberties dear, and I will continue to protect them from the bench!”
As for the committee’s critique of Izzo, she told Kentucky Public Radio that “equating one candidate who is supported with literally hundreds of thousands of dollars from liberal SuperPACs with me simply saying ‘thank you’ for an endorsement is rich.”
Taking sides on abortion
Both Izzo and Goodwine have often declined to reveal their own personal viewpoints on abortion rights, citing the need to remain impartial and avoid having to recuse themselves from potential cases involving the issue.
But Izzo has also touted her support from Kentucky Right to Life on Facebook, thanking the group for “strongly encouraging voters to support my candidacy.”
Addia Wuchner, the executive director of Right to Life, told Kentucky Public Radio the group’s PAC did not send issue questionnaires to either Supreme Court candidate or officially endorse anyone in the race, instead alerting “ProLife voters” that they “strongly encourage” a vote for Izzo.
Asked what made the group support Izzo, Wuchner would only say the PAC members and attorneys based “their strong encouragement off their knowledge and history of both candidates.”
Planned Parenthood of Kentucky’s PAC has spent roughly $7,000 on digital ads and mailers that tell voters Izzo’s position on abortion should be clear, based on her support from groups like Right to Life and her own social media posts.
Izzo recently said that her favorite current U.S. Supreme Court justice Samuel Alito because of his opinion in the Dobbs v. Jackson case that overturned Roe v. Wade and triggered Kentucky’s near-total abortion ban. Referring to Alito’s opinion, Izzo said “he looked at it and really examined it as a state’s rights issue, stating that this is something that belongs to the states. When I saw that, I was like, ‘that’s the correct analysis.’”
According to her candidate questionnaire highlighted by the Family Foundation of Kentucky and American Family Association of Kentucky, Izzo also states her support for Alito’s Dobbs opinion and indicates that she “strongly agree(s)” with the statement: “Human life deserves legal protection from conception until natural death.”
“Yes, as protected by the Constitution, which prohibits the government from depriving people of their life,” Izzo wrote, according to the group’s voter guide.
Izzo has also said in a forum and post that her favorite Supreme Court justice of all time is the late Antonin Scalia, a conservative known for his staunch belief that there is no constitutional right to abortion.
Planned Parenthood ads also tout a June post from Izzo in which she writes that she participated at a Walk for Life by the Pregnancy Health Center in Richmond, adding that he center “said it fight, LIFE IS SWEET.” Planned Parenthood says the group is one of many crisis pregnancy centers in the state that amount to being “fake clinics,” sharing “alarmist and inaccurate information about the physical and mental risks of abortion” in order to dissuade pregnant women from making that choice.
In a candidate forum hosted by the League of Women Voters of Lexington, Goodwine was asked what the judiciary’s role should be in “addressing divisive social issues such as reproductive rights.” Goodwine answered that she would interpret the laws fairly, administer justice equally and not “legislate from the bench,” but also determine “how that law affects and impacts society or the citizens.”
“It must determine whether there’s a fair application of that law and then make its determination with respect to fairness and the application of the law, ensuring that there’s equal access and fair application for all,” Goodwine said.
Kentucky’s near-total abortion ban has not been fully challenged yet in Kentucky’s court system, as several lawsuits have been dismissed due to plaintiffs’ lack of standing. Plaintiffs in one dismissed case are now challenging the ban at the Kentucky Court of Appeals.
Different experiences, different philosophies
Goodwine’s campaign has emphasized her 19 years of experience as a trial judge at the district, circuit and appellate court levels, noting that, if elected, she will be only the fifth justice in Kentucky history to serve at all four levels.
Izzo hasn’t conceded this issue, saying she has more “real world” litigation experience in private practice than Goodwine, including eight years as an arbitrator.
As for their judicial philosophies, Goodwine says she will be a “pragmatist.”
“I like to think about what the pragmatic effect is going to be, after looking at a law and determining whether or not it's ambiguous,” Goodwine said at a Frankfort Chamber of Commerce forum. “If it's not ambiguous, then I simply apply that law. If it is ambiguous, after looking to the intent of the legislators, I look at the pragmatic effect.”
Izzo has contrasted herself in forums as a “constitutional originalist,” focusing on the strict wording of the constitution or laws, but in cases of ambiguity she would look towards the intent of lawmakers.
State government and politics reporting is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
