On Tuesday, September 10, 2024, the Ohio Capital Journal reported that Ohio Supreme Court Justice Jennifer Brunner has decided not to recuse herself from a case involving the Ohio Ballot Board, despite ongoing legal disputes with its chair, Secretary of State Frank LaRose. The Ohio Attorney General’s Office had requested her recusal, citing her active federal lawsuit against LaRose and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost.
Brunner’s lawsuit challenges a 2021 law that mandates judicial candidates, including those running for the Supreme Court, to display their party affiliations on ballots. In her legal action, Brunner alleges violations of her constitutional rights, including equal protection, due process, and free speech. She contends that the law conflicts with the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct, which discourages judges from engaging in political activities that could be perceived as compromising their impartiality.
The Attorney General’s Office, represented by Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Blanton, argued that Brunner’s involvement in the lawsuit against LaRose creates a conflict of interest in the case concerning the Ohio Ballot Board. This case addresses the summary language for a proposed constitutional amendment on redistricting that is to appear on the November general election ballot. Opponents of the summary assert that it is misleading and does not comply with the state constitution’s requirements for ballot summaries and titles.
Blanton’s correspondence to the court emphasized that Brunner’s impartiality could be reasonably questioned given her separate legal action against LaRose. He pointed out that the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct allows judges to disqualify themselves if their impartiality might be reasonably questioned.
In response to the recusal request, Brunner characterized it as “without merit.” She stated her intention to participate fully in the redistricting amendment case, arguing that the request did not substantiate the need for recusal. Brunner’s decision to remain involved in the case aligns with her assertion that she can adjudicate the matter without bias.
The situation reflects broader issues within the Ohio judiciary, as other justices have faced similar calls for recusal in politically charged cases. Justice Patrick DeWine, for instance, has been asked to step aside from redistricting lawsuits related to his father, Governor Mike DeWine, who serves on the Ohio Redistricting Commission. In a separate instance, Justice Joe Deters did not recuse himself from cases linked to his previous role as Hamilton County prosecutor but opted to recuse himself from a lawsuit concerning a six-week abortion ban and another related to the House Bill 6 scandal.
Source: Ohio Capital Journal
