What is the Kansas Gov. trying to do here?

[Wisconsin Beth]

On Thursday, Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback signed a bill that threatens the entire state's judiciary with destruction if it rules against a law he favors. Brownback has spent much of his tenure attempting to curb the state supreme court and consolidate power in the executive branch. Thursday's startling maneuver suggests the deeply conservative governor has no compunction about simply obliterating separation of powers when another branch of government gets in his way.

The Kansas trouble started in 2014, when the state supreme court ruled that the disparity between school funding in rich and poor districts violated the state constitution. The justices ordered the legislature to fix the problem. Soon after, the legislature passed an administrative law that stripped the supreme court of its authority to appoint local chief judges and set district court budgets. (Instead, district court judges—who are often quite conservative—were allowed to elect their own chief judge.)

Arriving shortly after the school funding ruling, this law was widely seen as a retaliation against the court—and a warning. In their first ruling, the justices stopped short of declaring that the school system as a whole was constitutionally underfunded. But the court acknowledged that it would one day answer that question. And if the justices mandate more school funding, the legislature will have to raise taxes, a step few legislators are eager to take.

The administrative law, then, was likely an effort to scare the court out of issuing a dramatic ruling in favor of greater school funding. Just in case the court didn't get the message, Brownback and the legislature have also threatened the justices with blatantly political reforms, like subjecting them to recall elections, splitting the court in two, lowering the retirement age, and introducing partisan elections. (Currently, a nominating commission creates a pool of candidates, and the governor selects from that bunch.)

www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/06/08/kansas_governor_sam_brownback_threatens_to_defund_judiciary_if_it_rules.html

www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/06/supreme_court_showdown_in_kansas_to_save_the_judiciary_the_court_needs_to.html

I'm not sure if this is current events or politics, so Mods, feel free to move. 

[Wisconsin Beth]

And if anyone's got different/better sources, feel free to add them to this thread.  Not that Slate's biased or anything...... 

[Tennesseer]

'Judges and courts who rule on issues we both agree on are wise judges.  Judges and courts who disagree with me on issues I believe in are activist judges and they should be neutralized or recalled.'

This type of thinking is getting old.  There will always be judicial rulings I sometimes disagree with but that's life in the USA.  

[midjd]

Jun 12, 2015 8:58:04 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

'Judges and courts who rule on issues we both agree on are wise judges.  Judges and courts who disagree with me on issues I believe in are activist judges and they should be neutralized or recalled.'

This type of thinking is getting old.  There will always be judicial rulings I sometimes disagree with but that's life in the USA.  

I'm a big fan of the merit selection system for appellate courts. There are still ethical checks and balances in place via the disciplinary commission, but the governor or public can't "fire" judges simply because they don't like a ruling. Judges shouldn't have to be politicians, and having to look over your shoulder every time you write an opinion to make sure that you're not pissing off the wrong group isn't going to lead to good law. 

What they did to the Iowa Supreme Court after their ruling on same-sex marriage still makes me angry.

[Tennesseer]

Jun 12, 2015 9:06:16 GMT -5 midjd said:

Jun 12, 2015 8:58:04 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

'Judges and courts who rule on issues we both agree on are wise judges.  Judges and courts who disagree with me on issues I believe in are activist judges and they should be neutralized or recalled.'

This type of thinking is getting old.  There will always be judicial rulings I sometimes disagree with but that's life in the USA.  

I'm a big fan of the merit selection system for appellate courts. There are still ethical checks and balances in place via the disciplinary commission, but the governor or public can't "fire" judges simply because they don't like a ruling. Judges shouldn't have to be politicians, and having to look over your shoulder every time you write an opinion to make sure that you're not pissing off the wrong group isn't going to lead to good law. 

What they did to the Iowa Supreme Court after their ruling on same-sex marriage still makes me angry.

And as far as I know, Iowa is still a functioning state, still a great place to grow food and raise a family, and the folks still look out for each other. Iowans' Higher Power has not smote the state for its supreme court's decision.

[djAdvocate]

Brownback is leading the way on this- converting the courts into a political tool for the right.  if he succeeds, and it is franchised, we are pretty much doomed as a nation, as the only liberal institution left will fall.  sickening.

[mroped]

Communism anybody? 
One of the major things that put socialism on the path to dictatorship was concentrating the power I to the hands of one or very few. That way, "if you are not with us you are against and should be removed!" 

I think Mahmoud Ahmadinejad looks pretty sane right now! 

[Deleted]

Jun 12, 2015 10:51:20 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Brownback is leading the way on this- converting the courts into a political tool for the right.  if he succeeds, and it is franchised, we are pretty much doomed as a nation, as the only liberal institution left will fall.  sickening.

The machinations of conservatives seem atrocious when viewed by a non-conservative ?

[djAdvocate]

Jun 12, 2015 13:38:35 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Jun 12, 2015 10:51:20 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Brownback is leading the way on this- converting the courts into a political tool for the right.  if he succeeds, and it is franchised, we are pretty much doomed as a nation, as the only liberal institution left will fall.  sickening.

The machinations of conservatives seem atrocious when viewed by a non-conservative ?

i prefer a balance of views in my democracy.  the alternative is untenable, imo.

[Deleted]

Jun 12, 2015 14:26:48 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jun 12, 2015 13:38:35 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

The machinations of conservatives seem atrocious when viewed by a non-conservative ?

i prefer a balance of views in my democracy.  the alternative is untenable, imo.

Agreed.