In November, Michigan voters will choose two justices to serve on the state Supreme Court. Michigan Public's Morning Edition is featuring interviews with the four candidates. There are two candidates running for a partial four-year term. There are also two candidates running for a full eight-year seat on the court.
Kimberly Ann Thomas is on the ballot this fall. She's a professor at the University of Michigan Law School and is also a graduate of Harvard University Law School. She is a candidate for a full eight-year term.
Thomas spoke with Michigan Public's Morning Edition host Doug Tribou.
Democratic nominees currently hold a 4-3 majority on the Michigan Supreme Court.
Doug Tribou: I'll start by noting that judicial candidates in Michigan are listed without any party affiliation on the ballot. However, parties do nominate candidates for the court, and the Michigan Democratic Party selected you as one of its nominees.
You've had a long career as a law school professor. You've also done a lot of work as a public defender. Why did you decide to run?
Kimberly Ann Thomas: Yeah, I decided to run for the Michigan Supreme Court really because I care extremely about the quality of justice that people in our state receive. So I have been training the next generation of lawyers. I have been working in our court system and really feel like, you know, we need people with experience. We need people with expertise on our state Supreme Court to make those important decisions. And that's what I want to do.
DT: You co-founded the Juvenile Justice Clinic at Michigan Law. You also served on the Michigan Task Force on Juvenile Justice Reform in 2021-22 after being appointed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. What are some of the biggest changes you've seen in the area of juvenile justice in Michigan and what still needs work, in your opinion?
KAT: I was fortunate to be on the bipartisan Task Force for Juvenile Justice Reform, and that group took a research-and-evidence-based approach to looking across all of our systems in Michigan to see how we could improve juvenile justice in our state. And they came out with a series of recommendations, almost all of which were unanimous. And many of those have been passed into law. But I'm really heartened about the ability to collaborate across the state, to work with stakeholders to improve systems for people in our court system.
DT: I know there have been a number of changes and we've covered a lot of that here on Michigan Public. But is there one or two things that stand out to you as as the most significant?
KAT: Yeah. So there's a renewed emphasis on making sure that decisions that are made are informed by research on what works. Reform informed on research by what provides both public safety and rehabilitation to young people. And having those research-based systems in place so that actors in the system can have more information to make good decisions is really important.
DT: Where do you see shortcomings?
KAT: So there's still work to be done. There are a number of follow up groups looking at residential facilities and things like that. And those are tricky problems. And therea are people working really hard to solve them, but they're not overnight solutions.
DT: How would you describe your overall legal philosophy or approach?
KAT: I've been an attorney in the courts for 25 years, but I'm also a law professor. And so, really my approach on the Michigan Supreme Court is making sure I'm diving in. I'm doing all the work. I'm doing the research. You know, we need to make sure that our state Supreme Court is getting it right, that has full information and really has that sort of commitment to to integrity, but learning everything they need to know to to make the best decisions.
DT: Is there a case that you've worked on in your career that exemplifies the kind of approach that you'd bring to the state Supreme Court?
KAT: I've worked a lot with individuals in our trial courts, and I think that what I have learned from working with one person at a time is that [in] our courts, the idea that people receive that sort of interpersonal fairness, that they receive dignity from the courts, even if the case doesn't go their way, makes such a difference. They felt heard. They felt like they were respected. That increases the confidence in our system, the sense that people are getting fair decisions.
DT: With the caveat that as a candidate you can't discuss certain current or future cases that are likely to come before the court, I would like to ask you what you see as some of the key legal issues that could be important in the coming years for the Michigan court system.
"The wonderful thing about having been on the faculty at the University of Michigan Law School is that I am hearing all the time from different people in different areas of law."Michigan Supreme Court candidate Kimberly Ann Thomas
KAT: Of course, some of the more high-profile recent ones have dealt with labor and employment questions. Of course, constitutional law questions, questions around democracy and elections have been, recently, very high-profile.
But there's no way to know, right? The court receives the cases that that come to it. It's sort of waiting there to hear what disputes are important to the people of Michigan.
The wonderful thing about having been on the faculty at the University of Michigan Law School is that I am hearing all the time from different people in different areas of law and sort of getting information about lots of different areas of the law. And so I feel like that has given me the groundwork to to be on the court.
DT: On your campaign website, you note that you've been endorsed by some reproductive rights groups, Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan and Reproductive Freedom for All.
Although Michigan voters added abortion rights to the state constitution, it's an especially complicated time for the issue, with states establishing new laws, federal candidates being asked to take a stance on hypothetical federal bans on abortion.
What is your view of the legal complexities now and in the future for reproductive rights in Michigan and the U.S.?
KAT: Certainly many of those issues are being debated and discussed in the states. Of course, in our state legislatures and in the people of the states. Those issues may work their way to the Michigan Supreme Court. But, you know, until and unless they do, there's really not a case to comment on or to have an opinion on. I mean, every case is going to be very fact and law-specific.
DT: One thing that's played out a lot in the press, especially in recent years, is the divide on the U.S. Supreme Court, not the state Supreme Court. And I think that there's a perception of the politicization of the of the courts at the federal level. Although you're running and not currently on the court, I wonder what your view is of the state of things within the state court system versus the federal, when it comes to that divide that we hear so much about?
KAT: I think Michigan both is doing better than some of the comments on the federal level and is a better example. So there have been points in the history of the Michigan Supreme Court where we have been known for sort of acrimony and, sort of, you know, unprofessionalism, frankly. And that is not the case now. And I think that that's a really great development.
We need people who can work collaboratively. It is a seven-member court. Everybody has to work together to try to get to the best decisions possible. And so that collaboration, that attitude towards, making sure that the citizens of Michigan have confidence in the court — and don't think that there's this sort of internal sniping — is really important.
Editor's note: Quotes in this article have been edited for length and clarity. You can listen to the full interview near the top of this page.
