← Election Series · Down-ballot coverage · Michigan

Endorses Warren

The race

Michigan voters fill two seats on the state Supreme Court on November 3, 2026 — vote for no more than two of six candidates; the top two win eight-year terms. The race sits in the nonpartisan section of the ballot, but Michigan parties nominate supreme court candidates at their conventions, so the party backing is a matter of record and we use it openly. Democratic-nominated justices currently hold a 6–1 majority, and both seats on the ballot are already theirs, so this election cannot flip the court: if the Republican nominees won both seats, the majority would narrow to 4–3 and could not change hands until at least 2028. The nominees: Democrats renominated incumbents Megan Cavanagh and Noah Hood; Republicans nominated Casandra Morse-Bills and Michael D. Warren Jr.; the U.S. Taxpayers Party nominated Thomas Howe and Jody White — neither of whom is a licensed attorney, and Michigan law requires a justice to be licensed and admitted for at least five years, so neither could legally take office if elected, though both may appear on the ballot.

Megan Cavanagh — Chief Justice; Democratic nominee; first elected 2018. Cavanagh practiced appellate law before the bench and became chief justice in 2025. Her record is documented and consequential: she joined the 5–2 majority in Rouch World (2022), reading the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act's sex-discrimination ban to cover sexual orientation; she wrote the majority opinion in Pueblo v. Haas (2023), extending custody rights to some unmarried same-sex partners; and she voted for the court's 2023 pronoun rule. Endorsers: Michigan AFL-CIO, EMILY's List, Michigan Association for Justice, former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, Reproductive Freedom for All.

Noah Hood — Justice; Democratic nominee. Governor Gretchen Whitmer appointed Hood in 2025 to succeed Elizabeth Clement (who resigned in April 2025); he seeks his first full term. Before the supreme court he was appointed by Whitmer to Detroit's Third Circuit Court — where he presided over the Veterans Treatment Court — and in 2022 to the Michigan Court of Appeals; earlier he practiced commercial litigation and worked in the U.S. Attorney's Office in Toledo. Endorsers: Michigan AFL-CIO, Michigan Association for Justice, Eric Holder, Reproductive Freedom for All.

Michael D. Warren Jr. — Republican nominee (also endorsed by the Libertarian Party — a first for a Michigan supreme court candidate, per MIRS). Warren has sat on Oakland County's 6th Circuit Court since 2002 — more than 23 years — and says he has presided over more than 400 jury trials, more trial experience than the entire current supreme court combined. He previously served on the Michigan State Board of Education (from 1999), taught business law at Wayne State University and constitutional law at WMU Cooley Law School, and authored books on America's founding documents, including The Revolutionary Words That Forged America. His stated commitment: "defend constitutional rights, respect the limits of judicial power, and never legislate from the bench," interpreting the law as written. Endorsers: Michigan Chamber of Commerce, Michigan Right to Life, Citizens for Traditional Values, and The Detroit News editorial board.

Casandra Morse-Bills — Republican nominee. Morse-Bills is presiding judge of the 23rd Judicial Circuit (Alcona, Arenac, Iosco, and Oscoda counties), on the bench about eight years, after service as Oscoda County Prosecuting Attorney and private practice in the county where she was born and raised. Her stated standard: a "judge's job is to apply the law as it is written," dedicated to fairness and accountability. Endorsers: Michigan Chamber of Commerce, Michigan Right to Life, Citizens for Traditional Values, and The Detroit News editorial board.

Thomas Howe and Jody White — U.S. Taxpayers Party nominees. Howe, of Genesee County, says he runs to ensure the court "faithfully protects constitutional rights, administers justice fairly and operates with transparency and accountability." White previously ran for the state senate. The disqualifying fact is documented by multiple outlets: neither is licensed to practice law in Michigan, and the Michigan Constitution's qualifications require licensure plus five years of practice to take a supreme court seat. A vote for either is a vote for a candidate who cannot serve.

Pros and cons

Cavanagh: Credits: Eight years on the court and the chief justiceship — the institution's leader, chosen by her colleagues; an appellate-law formation. Dirt and debits: Her authored and joined opinions are the court's activist file in miniature — Pueblo v. Haas extended custody law by judicial decision, Rouch World read a protected class into a statute the Legislature had not amended (the Legislature later did amend it, which is how that change was supposed to happen). Proven judicial activism is the heaviest judicial flaw under our doctrine, and her record carries it.

Hood: Credits: The most varied service file among the Democratic pair — federal prosecutor's office, trial court including a veterans treatment court, and the Court of Appeals before elevation. Dirt and debits: Both of his judgeships came from a single Democratic governor within three years (circuit 2022 path via appointment, appeals 2022, supreme court 2025) — a rapid appointment-pipeline ascent with no election ever won for a bench and no proven restrained ruling retrieved; his endorsers are the same labor and abortion-rights organizations backing Cavanagh.

Warren: Credits: The deepest trial record in the race — 400-plus jury trials over 23 years on a major circuit court; a scholar's constitutional formation (two founding-documents books; taught constitutional law); the historically unusual dual Republican–Libertarian endorsement, which his quote frames correctly: two parties that agree on little agreed that Michigan needs a justice who respects judicial limits; Chamber and Detroit News backing. Dirt and debits: A public profile beyond the bench (podcaster and TV personality, per the candidate guides) is unusual for a sitting judge and voters may weigh it; no appellate bench service — his supreme court record is unproven (recorded as such).

Morse-Bills: Credits: A prosecutor-then-presiding-judge career in the rural circuit where she was raised — law-and-order formation plus the confidence of her fellow judges, who made her presiding judge; a plain textualist standard stated in terms. Dirt and debits: The smallest jurisdiction of any judge in this race — a four-county rural circuit is a narrower docket than Oakland County's; no appellate service; record beyond role and stated philosophy is thin in the sources retrieved.

Howe and White: Credits: Howe's stated aims (constitutional rights, transparency) are unobjectionable sentiments, and both men used a lawful path to the ballot. Dirt and debits: Neither is a licensed attorney. That is not a policy disagreement; it is a constitutional qualification failure. Neither could take the seat if he won. That ends their files.

Record gaps

OUR CALL

Our call: endorse Michael D. Warren Jr. and Casandra Morse-Bills. Per-seat slate reasoning, as this race requires: Michigan asks for two names, and the two Republican convention nominees are the only candidates who pair eligibility with a restraint record. Warren brings 23 years and 400 jury trials, a constitutional scholar's formation, and an explicit never-legislate-from-the-bench commitment that two rival parties independently ratified. Morse-Bills brings a prosecutor's law-and-order formation, her circuit's presiding judgeship, and the same law-as-written standard. Against them, the incumbents defend a 6–1 majority whose signature work — Rouch World, Pueblo — is judicial lawmaking we price as the heaviest flaw, and Howe and White cannot legally serve. Electing both nominees narrows the majority to 4–3 and puts the court one 2028 seat from balance. That is the maximum this ballot allows, and it is worth taking.

Vote Michael D. Warren Jr. and Casandra Morse-Bills.

For the complete Election 2026 breakdown — every race, claim by claim — see the full coverage on our website.

Vote early. Research your candidates. Choose the best moderates, whatever their party — no extremism from either side. And encourage your friends and family to do the same.

Sources

Election result — November 4, 2026

Result pending. No verified call (Associated Press or official) as of November 4, 2026. This page will be updated when the race is called or certified. The original article above is unchanged.

AI-assisted article — but the sources are human, and the facts are very real.

← Full down-ballot enumeration