As the election season in Ohio heats up, the race for the state’s Supreme Court has captured attention with its potential to shift the bench’s ideological orientation. Amongst the key contenders for one of the three seats is Justice Melody Stewart, who is defending her position against Justice Joe Deters. Deters, having been appointed to his current seat, aims to secure a full term, which is why he is contesting Stewart’s seat.
Over the summer, Justice Joe Deters drew widespread attention for his controversial opinion on a case involving the labeling of a chicken item in an Ohio restaurant. The item, advertised as a “boneless wing,” led to a legal dispute after a patron choked on a significant-sized bone found within it. This ruling sparked debate and levity, as Deters and his colleagues posited that the term “boneless” was more a description of cooking style than a literal assurance of the absence of bones. This decision has been described as one of the more puzzling exercises in textualism in recent memory, and for those interested in Deters’s full reasoning, the opinion is detailed here.
Justice Melody Stewart, who dissented in the ruling, has made it clear to voters that she finds her opponent’s interpretation of “boneless” troubling, even going so far as to share her perspective on social media, questioning the twisting of straightforward terminology. Her campaign emphasizes this point, suggesting that a vote for Deters equates to a choice for justices who cannot comprehend basic English vocabulary.
For voters, the decision could signify whether the court will be populated with justices who apply language interpretation in ways that might seem counterintuitive or comedic, or with those who advocate for conventional understanding, particularly in legal contexts. Additional insights about this judicial race and its broader implications are discussed in depth via Above the Law, providing context for Ohioans preparing to cast their ballots.