Pivotal Kentucky Supreme Court Race Highlights Partisan Divide and Judicial Philosophies

Lexington, Kentucky – A pivotal race is underway for the Kentucky Supreme Court’s Fifth District, featuring Court of Appeals Judge Pamela Goodwine and attorney Erin Izzo. The November election is set against a backdrop of partisan implications, financial support, and contrasting judicial philosophies.

Goodwine, a veteran jurist with 25 years of experience on the bench, is vying to become the first Black woman to serve on the Kentucky Supreme Court. She has never lost an election, winning her latest contested seat on the Court of Appeals in 2018. On the other hand, Izzo, who lives in Frankfort and works at the Lexington firm Landrum & Shouse, argues that her private sector experience suits her better for the role, despite lacking judicial experience.

The Fifth District encompasses Fayette County and its six surrounding counties, including Scott, Bourbon, and Clark, as well as Franklin County, where Izzo resides.

Monetary contributions have played a significant role in shaping the candidates’ campaigns. As of early October, Goodwine reported raising approximately $233,000, a stark contrast to Izzo’s $23,000. Her funding includes substantial donations from entities such as the Jefferson County Teachers Association and billionaire philanthropist Michael Bloomberg, raising concerns about partisanship in an inherently nonpartisan race. In contrast, Izzo’s financial backing stems primarily from small contributions from local Republican organizations.

Endorsements further highlight the partisan divide; Goodwine has received backing from notable Democratic figures, including Governor Andy Beshear. Critics argue this could undermine her impartiality if elected, given the Executive Branch frequently appears before the Supreme Court.

Both candidates articulate differing judicial philosophies. Izzo identifies as an “originalist,” reflecting her admiration for former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, emphasizing a strict interpretation of the Constitution. Goodwine, however, prefers a pragmatic approach, taking cues from retired Justice Stephen Breyer, advocating for flexibility in interpretation to address contemporary issues.

The election carries the potential to shift the court’s makeup, as the next appointee would be the fourth woman on the seven-member bench, achieving a majority-woman court for the first time.

As the race navigates financial backing, endorsements, and philosophical differences, both candidates aim to appeal to voters who are increasingly cautious of partisanship in judicial selections. With Election Day approaching, the stakes remain high in this significant judicial battle for the state’s highest court.