Kansas Supreme Court

It also provides oversight to the legal profession by setting rules that provide for the examination and admission of attorneys within the state, the code of professional responsibility which governs the conduct of attorneys, and include the canons of judicial ethics which regulate the conduct of judges.

[3] A nominee must be: If a person meets these requirements and wants to be considered for the office, they must complete a detailed nomination form summarizing their educational, professional, community, and financial background.

There is no official set of questions, but topics such as the potential nominees' legal scholarship, professional experience, writing ability, and community service are normally covered.

Once the interviews are complete, the commission enters into discussion to reduce the list to the top six to eight nominees.

If the Governor fails to make an appointment within 60 days the choice is then made by the Chief Justice of the Kansas Supreme Court.

[10] Initially the court worked in two separate divisions in an attempt to catch up with the four years long heavy case backlog that had built up.

[12][13][14][15] Many Republicans saw this as an act of judicial activism leading to some calls for changes in how justices are selected.

[17] The Court unanimously allowed then Attorney General Phill Kline to examine the abortion records of 90 women to investigate possible crimes.

[18] It later blocked Kline from pursuing 30 misdemeanor criminal charges against Dr. George Tiller after he lost office.

[19] The case was a major issue in the 2006 defeat of Kline by former prosecutor and then-Attorney General Paul J. Morrison whose investigation found no crimes.

[20] The Court ruled in Hermesmann v. Seyer (1993) that a woman is entitled to sue the father of her child for child support even if conception occurred as a result of a criminal act, including statutory rape, committed by the woman against the father.

It also ruled that a mother's potential culpability under the criminal statutes was of no relevance in determining the father's child support liability.

[22] In 2022, Kansas voters rejected a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would have overruled Hodes & Nasuer v.