4 candidates vying for 2 seats on Michigan Supreme Court in the Nov. 5 election

Tucked away on the nonpartisan section of the Nov. 5 ballot are elections for two seats on the Michigan Supreme Court. The outcome of those races will determine if Democrats retain their majority of nominated justices on the state's high court, or if Republicans can regain control.

And while the Michigan Supreme Court races may not garner the same amount of attention as the presidential contest at the top of the ticket or the election for Michigan’s open seat in the U.S. Senate, the candidates vying to be on the high court next year stress the importance of their race to voters.

Running for a partial, four-year term on the bench are incumbent Justice Kyra Harris Bolden, backed by Democrats to complete the remainder of her term after she was appointed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer to the bench last year, and Branch County Circuit Judge Patrick William O’Grady, nominated by Republicans.

And running for a full eight-year term are Kimberly Ann Thomas, a law professor and director of the Juvenile Justice Clinic at the University of Michigan, backed by Democrats, and state Rep. Andrew Fink, a Republican from Hillsdale. The seat became open after Justice David Viviano, nominated by Republicans, announced earlier this year he wouldn’t seek reelection.

While the races appear on the nonpartisan section of the ballot, candidates must be nominated by a political party to qualify. Additionally, a straight-ticket vote will not cover the Supreme Court elections.

The Michigan Supreme Court is the state’s highest court, tasked with ruling on and resolving disputed rulings from lower state courts.

In recent years, the court has issued several notable rulings, including determining ballot eligibility for gubernatorial and presidential candidates in 2022 and in 2024, finding that state prosecutors improperly used a one-man grand jury to indict several former state officials for their roles in the Flint water crisis, resulting in the prosecutions being tossed; and most recently, ruling lawmakers acted unconstitutionally in 2018 when they set Michigan’s minimum wage scale. In that ruling, the majority opinion directed the state to set a new scale that will see minimum wage rise to nearly $15 an hour by 2028.

Each candidate seeking one of the seats touted their experiences as making them an ideal choice to be on the bench when the Supreme Court starts its term next year.

Bolden and O’Grady note experience crafting, considering laws

Bolden ran for a seat on the Supreme Court in 2022, but ultimately fell short, receiving the third most votes for the two contested seats that year. With two incumbents then running for reelection, Bolden faced an uphill battle — incumbent justices are marked as “Justice of the Supreme Court” for voters on their ballots.

Now, Bolden has that advantage as the incumbent. Whitmer appointed her to the bench not long after the election, making Bolden the first Black woman to serve on the Michigan Supreme Court. Democrats have backed her to complete the rest of the term.

Before that, Bolden served two terms as a lawmaker in the Michigan House of Representatives. She said her experience in the Legislature has given her an understanding of how laws are crafted, something she said her fellow Supreme Court justices are able to lean on.

“One of the most important thought processes we have as justices (is) statutory interpretation,” Bolden said. “And so knowing how the sausage is made, and being able to share that with my colleagues, I feel has been a great resource for me and for them trying to get to the right answer.

More: Macomb County Prosecutor Peter Lucido may have violated campaign finance act

More: MAGADonald’s? Trump campaign is selling t-shirts off fast-food visit

“It's not uncommon for one of my colleagues to say, 'Kyra, what was the Legislature thinking?’ And obviously I don't always know, but I've had that perspective of what goes into making a law that I can share with my colleagues.”

Before being elected to the Michigan House of Representatives in 2018, Bolden was a judicial clerk for Judge John A. Murphy in Wayne County and later practiced civil litigation at Lewis and Munday, her campaign previously said.

O’Grady, who goes by Bill, has been a Branch County Circuit judge since 2008, having been a prosecutor and a Michigan State Police trooper before that, according to his campaign. He described himself as a “rule of law” judge and argued his experience in different aspects of the criminal justice system gives a perspective on how courts can affect the lives of those involved in legal disputes.

“I think that when you have the incremental experience, as I did ... I think that incrementally just allows you to realize that everyone wants to be heard, everyone needs the information to be looked at very impartially,” O’Grady said.

That experience on the bench, O’Grady argued, is something needed on the high court. During an interview, he noted the only current justices who have been judges in lower courts are the retiring Viviano and Justice Brian Zahra. There is no requirement, of course, for Michigan Supreme Court justices to have held a judgeship in a lower court, but O’Grady said handling cases at a lower level has prepared him for a role as a justice.

“When the seven justices are sitting around determining what case to take up or how to answer the case that they did take up, at least one justice at that table should have the judicial experience of understanding what it's like to be in the courtroom and presiding over the most highest-level cases,” he said.

Fink and Thomas vie for full, eight-year term

The other race, between Thomas and Fink, is for a full eight-year term on the Michigan Supreme Court.

The race is significant in determining the court’s majority. Democrats currently have a 4-3 advantage in terms of nominated judges on the court. With Viviano, a Republican-nominated justice, opting to not seek reelection, the Democrats’ advantage would widen to 5-2 if Thomas is elected and Bolden is reelected. But Republicans also have the opportunity to flip the court — wins by Fink and O'Grady would give Republican-backed judges a 4-3 advantage. GOP-nominated justices last held a majority before the 2020 elections.

But Fink, who decided to run for justice rather than seek a third term in the Michigan House, believes he’s connecting with voters during his Supreme Court run. Fink acknowledged he’s been critical of the court recently, including disagreeing with the majority opinion in the adopt and amend case.

“I’m not running to achieve a personal goal, so much as to try and help reset some priorities for the future,” Fink said.

In the Legislature, he’s currently the Republican minority vice chair on the House Judicial Committee. Before becoming a lawmaker, Fink served in the U.S. Marine Corps, where he was a judge advocate. After completing his service, he practiced private law at his family’s law firm, Fink and Fink, according to his campaign.

Fink said his experience practicing cases at trial and appellate courts gives him an understanding of how the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the state’s laws are going to be applied at lower courts in future cases.

Thomas leads the Juvenile Justice Clinic at the University of Michigan, where law students represent minors charged in the criminal justice system who cannot afford legal representation. She was also previously appointed to the state’s bipartisan Juvenile Justice Task Force in 2021 and 2022.

“My career — I've been a lawyer for 25 years — has been committed to trying to work for individual clients in the system, to understand what everyone's experience is in our court system, and make sure that things like how much money you make or where you live don't impact the quality of justice that people receive, and that's really part of what drives me to want to run to the Michigan Supreme Court,” she said.

She touted her experience working with groups like the Juvenile Justice Task Force and believes she would bring a collaborative approach not only to the bench, but also to the various task forces that the Michigan Supreme Court oversees, as well.

Bolden, Thomas say justice must be for all

Both Bolden and Thomas stressed their belief that the justice system in Michigan needs to treat all who enter it equally, regardless of their economic status or background. Bolden said the hallmark theme of her reelection campaign has been “justice for generations” — an effort to convey to voters that the precedent by the Michigan Supreme Court can stand for decades or even longer until lawmakers or another court decides otherwise on a certain issue.

“We have to think about the longevity and the consequences of the decisions that we're making today on the bench, because it really affects generations to come,” Bolden said.

When she first ran for the court two years ago, Bolden made equity in the justice system a central theme of her campaign. She said ensuring that every Michigander, regardless of background, feels represented in the justice system remains a priority.

Thomas said throughout her legal career, she’s worked to understand how the legal system intersects with everyday people.

“Our state Supreme Court is the last word on our state laws and our state constitution’s provisions,” Thomas said. “(I) certainly, want to make sure that we are applying the law fairly, and that we have justices that are attuned to the responsibilities of the court in applying the law and delivering equal justice to all Michiganders across the state.”

Republican-backed nominees say court must be predictable

Fink and O’Grady both said their campaigns are targeted at bringing stability to the court. O’Grady said during an August candidate forum in Hartland, “We now have a far-left court."

He said the Michigan Supreme Court needs to be a rule of law and textualist court.

“We are not to be judicial activists. We are simply supposed to apply the law that is written by the Legislature,” O’Grady said.

Fink also said the court needs to be predictable — in a predictable legal setting, those involved in the court system can understand how legal text is read and applied, creating less uncertainty for people affected by court rulings, he said.

For Fink, the legal reasoning in the majority opinion in the adopt and amend case “was faulty, and that the dissent had a much stronger case to be made."

"And that's important to me, because the court needs to have good, sound reasoning that is intelligible to litigators, litigants, people, so that the rest of us can organize our lives according to predictable legal results," he added. “And when the court is predictable, the amount of litigation actually just goes down, because people understand kind of how the issues are likely to be resolved,” he added.

Abortion advocates invest in Supreme Court races

Elections for the Michigan Supreme Court typically pale in terms of campaign spending compared with other races on the ballot, especially in a presidential year.

Campaign finance reports filed with the Secretary of State’s Office indicate Bolden’s campaign has spent the most this election cycle, pouring just more than $1 million into her reelection bid. Thomas’ campaign has spent almost $836,000, reports show.

The Democratic-nominated candidates are outspending their Republican-backed counterparts — O’Grady’s most recent filing indicates his campaign has spent almost $48,000 so far, while Fink’s campaign states it has spent nearly $135,000.

But outside groups are investing in the Michigan Supreme Court elections, including two organizations investing millions of dollars in highlighting abortion access as being on the ballot along with the candidates for justice.

In September, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Michigan announced it was spending $2 million on voter education projects for the Supreme Court races, highlighting candidates’ stances on voting rights, LGBTQ rights and abortion. Although the organization does not endorse any candidates, its positions on issues like abortion and others largely line up with Democrats.

Michigan Planned Parenthood Votes, a political action committee affiliated with the abortion access group, also announced it was spending $2.1 million on pro-abortion rights messaging in the presidential, Michigan Supreme Court and legislative races, including digital ads touting Bolden's and Thomas’ campaigns.

Fink criticized the ACLU of Michigan’s spending and reiterated his judicial approach is to treat each case based on the text of the laws or precedent being decided.

“Trying to persuade voters based on the perceived political preferences or policy preferences of a judicial candidate, rather than engaging with a candidate's judicial philosophy, I think is ... unfortunately, cynical," he said.

Election Day is Tuesday, Nov. 5. The outcome of the Michigan Supreme Court races will determine whether Democrats can keep or expand their majority on the state's high court, or if Republicans can flip control.

Contact Arpan Lobo: [email protected]

Looking for more on Michigan’s elections this year? Check out our voter guide, subscribe to our elections newsletter and always feel free to share your thoughts in a letter to the editor.

This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Voters to decide elections for 2 Michigan Supreme Court seats