By Nick Reynolds
Casper Star-Tribune
Via Wyoming News Exchange
CASPER — Gov. Matt Mead on Tuesday tapped his Chief of Staff Kari Jo Gray to be the final Wyoming Supreme Court judge selected by his administration, his office announced in a statement Tuesday.
“Kari has had a long, distinguished career,” said Mead in a statement. “Her experience includes the private practice of law, public service at a high executive level, and business ownership. She has an outstanding academic record and great work ethic. She is a dedicated public servant with a brilliant legal mind and will serve our state and its citizens well on the Supreme Court.”
Gray, a longtime attorney and the former director of the Department of Family Services under Gov. Jim Geringer, will replace outgoing justice James Burke, who will reach the court’s age cap of 70 years old next month. Other nominees included Sheridan-based District Court Judge John G. Fenn and Laramie County-based District Court Judge Steven K. Sharpe.
“I felt privileged to be on the list of three provided to the Governor for this position and am honored to have the opportunity to be a part of Wyoming’s great judiciary,” Gray said in a statement. “I have long admired the Wyoming Supreme Court for the work that it does and respect the Justices who sit on it. I look forward to serving the people of Wyoming and will give my all to meet the responsibilities of this key position.”
Serving on the highest court in the state, justices on the Wyoming Supreme Court have the final say on the interpretation of the state constitution. Throughout the length of his administration, Mead has appointed more than 30 judges to Wyoming’s courts, including three Supreme Court judges.
One of the most important positions in state government, a Wyoming State Supreme Court justice has the opportunity to impact the lives of thousands of Wyomingites for decades to come. Steve Easton, the former dean of the University of Wyoming’s Law School, said decisions they make on the bench can far outlive those made by any elected official, making the governor’s choice all the more critical.
“The state Supreme Court has the final word on any issues involving Wyoming law,” said Easton. “You can’t take a case to the U.S. Supreme Court and argue that the Wyoming Supreme Court misinterpreted Wyoming law. They are the final word on what Wyoming law is.”
In many cases, the decisions made by Wyoming Supreme Court judges can be examined and discussed long after the final gavel falls. In 2014, the court overturned the conviction of Buffalo resident Richard Wilkerson for his role in a deadly bar fight, ruling that Wyoming’s precedent for determining second-degree murder was insufficient to conclude a person acted with ill will. Another recent case, involving State Treasurer Matt Gordon and Mead himself, involved the vetting of the capitol reconstruction project. Another case, involving former state Superintendent of Public Instruction Cindy Hill several years ago, found the Legislature had overstepped its bounds in stripping responsibilities from the education department’s influence.
Some cases, including the Campbell County School District hearings of the 1990s, completely changed the way schools in Wyoming are funded, showing the courts’ ability to have an outward impact on state policies long after they were decided. In that case, the Supreme Court agreed that mineral-rich districts in the state should be equally-funded with all the other school districts in the state, concluding that the quality of an education should not be determined by the wealth of those districts.
“That is one of the most dramatic examples of the importance of a Supreme Court justice,” said Paul Hickey, a Cheyenne-based attorney involved in that case. “To no surprise, some people in the Legislature were upset that their method of funding was found unconstitutional, and it’s been a long road and a long journey to progress from that system to a more cost-based model of funding education and educational services.”
Where picks for the United States Supreme Court are often scrutinized for their political significance, nominations to the Supreme Court here are unencumbered by the weight of partisan politics.
Wyoming’s judges are selected on system known colloquially as the “Missouri Plan,” where potential appointments are chosen by an unbiased, non-partisan commission of three peer-elected members of the state bar association and three non-lawyers, who are appointed by the governor. Though a governor could, in theory, select a judge based off his own political leanings, Easton said the implications of doing so would not bode well for the public’s perception of the court.
“One of the things people don’t think about that is really important are people’s acceptance of the decisions made by the judicial system,” he said. “If people lose confidence in the neutrality and integrity of the decisions from the judicial branch, that is very dangerous to our society. All of us grumble about certain decisions that don’t come out the way we want, but we are pretty confident in this country of the relative fairness of the judicial branch of government.”
Selecting the three judges the governor has to pick from is an extensive, multi-layered process. Richard Honaker, one of the non-appointed members of the selection committee, said that when its members review the applications, they tend to look for people who are professionally competent, experienced in the profession of law, maintain a high level of integrity and have what he calls “good, judgmental temperament.”
“For someone reviewing cases out of the district court, it’s very helpful to have someone who has had experience hearing criminal cases while sitting on the district court,” said Jeremiah Sandburg, the Laramie County district attorney.
After receiving these expressions of interest and the eight various reference letters that are required, the commission – after each individually reviewing the materials – has a conference call to decide how many people should be interviewed in-person.
“We try and give him good choices,” Honaker said.
Though the membership of the nominating commission is quite public, Honaker said he has rarely noticed outside influences trying to sway the outcome of who the commission eventually nominates. However, once the names are made public a month before a nomination is made, he said there is a possibility that some may try and influence who the governor eventually selects.
None of the several attorneys interviewed by the Star-Tribune, however, felt that would be the case.
“The governors of Wyoming have the best interests of the State of Wyoming at heart and have acknowledged the separation of powers between the three branches of government,” said Hickey. “Those that have served over my lifetime have accepted the importance of those judges and done their best to make sure the best person for the job gets appointed.