Bill Cunningham has served on Kentucky’s Supreme Court since 2006 but recently announced he’d be retiring from the court at the end of January. Austin Carter spoke with Cunningham about his retirement and issues surrounding the Court.
Cunningham cites three recent cases as some of the most important he’s ruled on including Governor Matt Bevin’s failed pension bill, medical panels and right to work. “Those three have been huge cases having a wide ranging impact,” Cunningham says.
With thousands of cases under his belt, Cunningham cites experience as the primary factor in making an effective jurist. “I think experience is absolutely critical in this job,” Cunningham said. In addition to that, Cunningham said having good law clerks and secretaries is another crucial component. “I’ve been really blessed in my 12 years as having some of the best young minds and good writers helping me throughout these years.”
After 12 years on the Supreme Court and an over 40 year career, Cunningham says his main reason for retirement is that he’s “burnt-out.” “You can only take so much human misery and woe that it just piles up on you,” Cunningham said. At 74, he describes himself as an old-man who’s ready for a change. Nonetheless, he says it’s “sad to leave,” and that’ll he’ll miss those who he has worked with over the years.
Cunningham sees some changes in the process of legislation as it affects the judiciary, especially when it comes to criticism of the court for its recent decisions. “People talk about ‘activist’ judges.,” Cunningham said. “This has not been an activist court. The last 3 decisions we made were simply interpretation of our state constitution. We took the literal wording of what the state constitution said and we applied it.” Cunningham says that when legislators pass statutes that are vague or ambiguous, it becomes the role of the judiciary to interpret what they mean. He sees this as one of the reasons for the vital importance of the judicial branch of government. “If you don’t have a viable and strong judiciary, people can get hurt, people can get walked on and rights can get trampled.”
Despite the criticism of judges being “activists,” Cunningham sees that accusation as being part of the partisan political process. “I’ve set on this court for 12 years, and we take the case, we decide on what the law says and sometimes the law’s not clear and you have to make a call,” Cunningham said. “I’ve found that activist judges are those that make a decision you don’t agree with.” In response to Governor Bevin’s claims that the Supreme Court’s ruling on his failed pension bill were the fault of “activist judges,” Cunningham says they simply referred to the state’s constitution. “We took the plain reading of the constitution and applied it. But it didn’t go the way that he wanted it to so we’re ‘activist judges.’”
Cunningham said the court upholds ninety to ninety-five percent of the legislation that’s passed. Even in the circumstance that they believe the legislation to be detrimental or poorly conceived. “[If] there’s nothing unconstitutional about it, it’s a legislative priority and therefore we uphold it,” Cunningham says. “We do that in most cases.”
The judge doesn’t have any specific plans for his retirement after January 31st. He’s been busy preparing to depart the court, and recently saw his son sworn in as a congressman from South Carolina in the nation’s capital. “It’s been a whirlwind,” Cunningham says. He thinks it will take a month or so to recover from his “burnout” but he hopes to do something productive.