On September 4th, I attended an Ohio College Democrats’ meeting and listened to Judge Lisa Forbes speak. She is currently running for a seat on the Ohio Supreme Court as a Democrat against her opponent, Republican Judge Dan Hawkins. She has an undergraduate degree from Cornell and a law degree from Case Western. She was a partner at Vorys for several years before running for, and winning, a seat on the 8th District Court of Appeals in 2020.

Why were the words Republican and Democrat used to describe the judges? Especially since the judiciary is supposed to be independent and above politics. That’s because, in Ohio, it isn’t anymore.

In 2021, legislators in Ohio changed the rules to list party affiliations next to most judicial candidates on the ballot, including races for the Ohio Supreme Court. Before this, Ohio had a unique system where judicial candidates campaigned in partisan primaries, but then in the November general elections were listed without their party affiliation to promote judicial independence. Republicans claim that this provides more information to voters and that the campaign is already partisan. Democrats, many Ohio legal institutions, and Lisa Forbes oppose this. They think it is just a political tactic since Democrats before this won three of the past four elections (2018 and 2020) which narrowed the Republican majority on the court to 4-3. Unfortunately, it will probably be an effective political tactic, since Republicans tend to do well when party affiliation is listed on the ballot.

Judge Forbes made the case that the judicial branch should be about the law, not politics. She emphasized that she was committed to the rule of law and did not factor her personal opinions into her rulings. In a Columbus Dispatch article, she said “I believe firmly that the Supreme Court is the last line of defense for our rights and liberties and that it should act as a firewall to protect our democracy”. She emphasized this theme repeatedly at the meeting, especially regarding abortion rights. Ohio has passed a constitutional amendment making abortion legal in the state, but there are still many cases that could chip away at this right in the wings. If the Supreme Court becomes 8-1 conservative, they could easily impose their own questionable interpretations onto this right. Since they are the highest state court and federal courts cannot rule on the interpretations of state constitutions, they have the final say on abortion. Judge Forbes is understandably worried about this.

She also critiqued a recent decision by the Ohio Supreme Court that made national news: declaring that boneless chicken wings can have bone in them. She cited this as an example of her Republican colleagues legislating from the bench and said she would have made a different decision more grounded in the law. She also talked about how experience is valuable on the bench and said that she did have that experience.

Tying her talk into larger themes of democratic erosion, Judge Forbes is a microcosm for the increased polarization and political turn of America’s judiciary. Historically, the judicial branch has been grounded in the law and heavily reliant on institutional norms. Lately, these fundamental concepts have been eroding. The Supreme Court has greatly expanded its institutional power over the years, “But its deployment of this discretionary autonomy has reflected above all its institutional interests in maximizing its jurisdiction over prestigious policy questions” (Huq and Ginsberg, 59). Supreme Court nominees used to be confirmed with the full support of the Senate if they were qualified candidates. That is not the case anymore. Now it is completely a partisan battle, with “Polarization has been on the rise since the 1980s, dividing Americans into hostile “us vs. them” camps”(Ferrell, 2) including, now, the judiciary. This, and recent contentious rulings on divisive policy issues have hurt the Supreme Court’s reputation. The Supreme Court used to poll well above Congress and the Executive branch in public opinion polls but that is not true today.

This trend extends beyond the Supreme Court to state courts too. Lisa Forbes said she was first inspired to run for Judge because she was concerned about how the public’s confidence in the courts was eroding. Courts used to get very little attention. This has changed as state and federal courts inject themselves into polarizing issues like abortion. People are realizing the importance of institutions like the Ohio Supreme Court. State courts are also becoming more political as the public stops weighing the candidates based on merit and instead looks at the letter next to their name.

Lisa Forbes was an excellent speaker and I enjoyed hearing what she had to say. She pitched herself well and garnered my support. I’m pessimistic, given the increased politicization of the courts, but I do hope she wins. Afterward, a very long line formed to ask her additional questions. She stayed for at least another 20 minutes. This behavior stood out to me. She did not have to stay and answer a bunch of college students’ questions, but she did. Her character, along with her extensive legal experience, shows why she should be on the Ohio Supreme Court.

Additionally, I do not like the recent shifts in America’s broader legal system and, more specifically, what’s happening in Ohio. I am scared of what will happen if Justice Forbes, Donnely, and Stewart (the three Democratic candidates) do not win in November. I think I will disagree with many of the Republican Justices’ decisions. The judicial branch is more important than you think it is, go vote for every race on the ballot!