In a pivotal moment shaped by the U.S. Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade, state supreme courts have emerged as key battlegrounds for the future of abortion rights. As voters prepare to head to the polls on November 5th, contentious elections in states like Michigan and Ohio could dramatically shift the ideological makeup of their highest courts, drawing intense national attention and financial firepower.
Since the federal ruling in 2022 redirected the abortion debate to state legislatures, 13 conservative states have implemented bans, while others have imposed severe restrictions. Simultaneously, voters in multiple states have fought back, embedding abortion protections into state constitutions. This year’s elections are a continuation of that clash, with both sides investing heavily to shape the judiciary.
The stakes are especially high in Michigan and Ohio, where state supreme court justices will play a decisive role in interpreting new constitutional amendments. Groups backing abortion rights, such as the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood Votes, are pouring millions into campaigns, highlighting the importance of these races for civil and reproductive freedoms.
Ohio’s races are heating up, with six candidates vying for three seats. Democrats are focused on flipping the court’s 4-3 conservative majority by leveraging the abortion rights issue, despite the state’s recent constitutional amendment guaranteeing access. Television ads have underscored what’s at stake, warning against “extremist judges” threatening reproductive freedom.
Michigan’s judicial battle follows a similar pattern. Although its constitution now safeguards abortion rights, two seats on the nonpartisan state supreme court could change the dynamics of its 4-3 Democratic-backed majority. Justice Kyra Harris Bolden and challenger Kimberly Ann Thomas have outspent their Republican opponents, recognizing the critical role the court will continue to play.
Elsewhere, races in Montana, North Carolina, and Arizona are also seeing unprecedented spending. Republicans and Democrats alike are mobilizing voters, understanding that state supreme courts will increasingly shape laws on not just abortion but other contested issues.
Campaign rhetoric has taken on a sharper, more partisan edge. Where judicial hopefuls once focused on “fairness” and “family values,” candidates now openly discuss their stances on matters like abortion. North Carolina Justice Allison Riggs, for instance, is emphasizing her personal connection to reproductive healthcare as she seeks to retain her seat. Meanwhile, her opponent Jefferson Griffin champions conservative constitutional interpretations.
The outcome of these races will not only determine the ideological tilt of key state courts but also signal how deeply abortion and other divisive topics have reshaped the once-staid world of judicial elections.
