Statewide — Oklahoma Supreme Court retention, judge by judge

← Election Series · Down-ballot coverage · Oklahoma

Per-judge retention calls inside

The ballot

Oklahoma's appellate justices are appointed by the governor from a list of three finalists provided by the Judicial Nominating Commission — a system built after the 1960s bribery scandal in which three sitting justices were convicted over bribes for decisions. Justices then face retention elections every six years: an uncontested yes-or-no question, voted district by district but counted statewide in effect — shall this justice be retained in office? A majority of YES votes retains; a majority of NO votes removes the justice, and the governor appoints a successor from a new Commission list. The election is November 3, 2026.

Four justices are on the ballot: M. John Kane IV (District 1), Travis Jett (District 4), Dana Kuehn (District 6), and Richard Darby (District 9).

Oklahoma publishes no official performance evaluations — there is no commission recommendation to price. What exists instead is an unusually active commentary ecosystem, printed below with its bases evaluated. Context: Oklahoma retention is genuinely contested terrain — in 2024 Justice Yvonne Kauger became the first justice in state history to lose a retention vote (49.8% YES), after an organized campaign against her. Governor Kevin Stitt appointed Justice Jett to that seat in April 2025. Also on this ballot, State Question 845 would change the Judicial Nominating Commission's composition rules — a separate decision from these four names, covered in its own article in this series.

Justice M. John Kane IV — District 1

• Appointed by: Governor Kevin Stitt, 2019. On the court seven years.
• The scored records, both columns: The Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs' Judicial Scorecard — an advocacy scorecard that grades justices on how its own analysts score key rulings (tort reform, life, free speech, mandates) — gives Kane a 79% lifetime score, second-highest of the four on this ballot. An opposing lens scores him worst of the four: FOIBible's Transparency Scorecard, which counted votes in the 12 Oklahoma Supreme Court decisions on the Open Records and Open Meeting Acts it tracks since 2021, scores Kane 31% for transparency (4–9) — "often discussed as favoring government secrecy," in its words. Both are ruling-counting exercises by advocacy counters; both are printed, with their methods, because together they describe a real pattern worth a voter's attention: business- and liberty-side raters score Kane high, open-government raters score him low.
• The commentary calls: Commentator Michael Bates recommends YES on Kane; the Oklahoma State Capital journal likewise calls yes on Kane, Kuehn and Jett (with Darby the exception). One open-government-focused voter guide recommends NO on Kane, citing the open-meetings case #120981 and a recusal in a bond-validation case — ruling and recusal grounds, not misconduct.
• Dirt: No disciplinary record, ethics finding, or misconduct allegation surfaced. The transparency score is a documented voting pattern on one subject, printed as exactly that.

Justice Travis Jett — District 4 (special)

• Appointed by: Governor Kevin Stitt, April 2025 — filling the seat Justice Kauger lost in the 2024 retention vote. On the court about a year and a half; this is his first retention vote.
• The scored records: OCPA's scorecard gives Jett an 84% lifetime score, the highest of the four — on a short record, which the scorecard's own "2025 — Current" label makes plain. FOIBible's transparency count scores him 17% (1–5) on the handful of open-government cases he has sat on; with roughly six counted votes, that figure is a small sample and we print it as one.
• Credits: Every commentator in our research who takes a position — Bates, the Oklahoma State Capital journal, columnist Steve Fair — recommends retaining him.
• Dirt: None documented. A short record is unproven, not a demerit — the same standard this page applies everywhere. Voters are entitled to note that his file is eighteen months deep, not eight years; the evidence that exists is favorable from the cycle's most detailed raters.

Justice Dana Kuehn — District 6

• Appointed by: Governor Kevin Stitt, 2021. On the court five years. She is the court's Vice Chief Justice.
• The scored records: OCPA lifetime score 83%. FOIBible transparency score 67% (6–3) — tied best of the four on the open-government count, including a 4–0 record on Open Meeting Act cases.
• The commentary calls: Retain recommendations from Bates, the Oklahoma State Capital journal and Steve Fair; the open-government voter guide that opposes Kane and Darby singles Kuehn out for a YES, noting she "voted FOR THE PEOPLE in both cases" it tracks.
• Dirt: None documented — she is the only justice on this ballot whom raters on both sides of the transparency argument score well.

Justice Richard Darby — District 9

• Appointed by: Governor Mary Fallin, 2018. On the court eight years — the longest-serving of the four, and the only one not appointed by Governor Stitt.
• The case against him, printed in full: Darby is the one justice on this ballot facing organized do-not-retain recommendations from multiple conservative commentators. Bates recommends NO. The Oklahoma State Capital journal recommends NO on Darby alone of the four, arguing he should not share in the deference it extends to "this new generation of justices." The open-government guide recommends NO, citing his votes in case #120981 and bond-validation case #O-120619. OCPA's scorecard gives him a 52% lifetime score — by far the lowest of the four, against 79–84% for the Stitt appointees.
• The other column: FOIBible's transparency count — no friend of this court — scores Darby 67% for transparency (6–3), tied with Kuehn for best of the four. And the stated bases of every NO recommendation in our research are rulings: which side of scored cases he took, including the court's 5–4 decision blocking circulation of the SQ 843 homestead-exemption initiative petition, in which the NO-side commentary counts him with the majority.
• Our evaluation of the case: A 52% score on one advocacy scorecard measures agreement with that scorecard's positions across a career — it documents that Darby is the least OCPA-aligned justice on this ballot, not that he has failed at the job. No source in this research documents misconduct, an ethics finding, or a pattern of refusing to follow binding precedent. Under this page's standard — disagreement with rulings is an argument voters may weigh, printed above at full strength, and it is not proven cause for removal — the case against Darby does not meet the bar his opponents would need. Voters who price OCPA alignment itself will vote NO with their eyes open; we do not join the call.

OUR CALL

Our rule: Retain is the verdict for a judge with a serviceable documented record; removal requires proven cause — documented misconduct, proven activist judging that breaks faith with the law, or an evaluation failure. Oklahoma offers no official evaluation; the documented record for all four is advocacy scorecards and commentary, in both columns, printed in full above. No proven cause exists against any of the four — including the most-targeted one.

Retain: M. John Kane IV, Travis Jett, Dana Kuehn, Richard Darby. Do not retain: none.

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 - Oklahoma Policy Institute, 2026 — judges on the 2026 ballot (roster, districts, retention mechanics) — https://okpolicy.org/judges-ballot-oklahoma-need-know/ - OCPA Judicial Scorecard — lifetime scores (Jett 84%, Kuehn 83%, Kane 79%, Darby 52%) and tenure labels — https://ocpathink.org/judicial-scorecard - FOIBible, 2026 — Transparency Scorecard (12 tracked Open Records/Open Meeting decisions; Darby 67%, Kuehn 67%, Kane 31%, Jett 17%) — https://foibible.com/commentary/the-transparency-scorecard-how-four-oklahoma-supreme-court-justices-on-your-ballot-voted-on-open-government - Michael Bates, BatesLine, October 2026 — retention recommendations (YES Kane, Jett, Kuehn; NO Darby) and the SQ 843 context — https://batesline.substack.com/p/state-questions-845-and-847 - Oklahoma State Capital journal, October 2026 — "yes on Kane, Kuehn, and Jett… no on Darby"; Hudson analysis — https://oklahomastatecapital.substack.com/p/the-november-ballot-no-one-is-talking - Steve Fair, October 2026 — recommendations (retain all four justices) — http://stevefair.blogspot.com/2026/10/steves-recommendations-on-sqs-judges.html - Ballotpedia News, January 15, 2026 — Oklahoma retention context (Kauger's 2024 loss, 49.8%; historical averages) — https://news.ballotpedia.org/2026/01/15/an-early-look-at-state-supreme-court-retention-elections-this-year/ - 2026 United States judicial elections (compilation citing Ballotpedia) — roster verification — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_United_States_judicial_elections

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

← Full down-ballot enumeration