Fact check: Why are judicial races in Michigan separated by incumbency?

September 25, 2026

Michigan's ballot system gives incumbent judges a distinct advantage by placing them in separate "Incumbent Position" sections, away from other judicial candidates. This practice began with a 1982 state law that judges themselves actively lobbied for, arguing it would allow them to concentrate on judicial duties rather than fundraising and campaigning. While supporters claimed the separation would actually help newcomers by preventing direct competition with sitting judges, critics contended it insulated incumbents and made judicial elections less competitive.

Who is affected

Incumbent judges in Michigan (particularly the 16 running in Wayne County's 3rd Circuit Court mentioned)
Non-incumbent judicial candidates competing for open seats
Voters in Michigan who cast ballots for judges
Lawyers who may run for judicial positions or argue cases before judges they previously ran against
Outlier reader Elisa Gomez (who submitted the story idea)

What action is being taken

No explicit ongoing actions are described in the article. The article discusses a law passed in 1982 and its continued effects, but does not mention current actions being taken to change or maintain the system.

Why it matters

This ballot structure significantly impacts Michigan's judicial elections by providing incumbent judges with a substantial electoral advantage, effectively reducing competition and voter choice. The separate ballot sections make it easier for sitting judges to win re-election without vigorous campaigning or fundraising, which supporters argue protects judicial integrity but critics view as undermining the democratic election process. This affects the composition of Michigan's judiciary and raises questions about whether judicial elections are meaningful contests or merely symbolic exercises that favor those already in power.

What's next

No explicit next steps stated in the article

Read full article from source: bridgedetroit.com