We are less than three months out from Election Day. For many of us, it will be an incredible experience to tune in to our favorite show or a Buckeyes game without being bombarded by political advertisements. As a voter, it can be easy to overlook certain races when you are constantly seeing information about the US Senate race or the Governor’s race. The races for the Ohio Supreme Court may receive less public attention, but the Court plays a critical role in interpreting the law and shaping Ohio’s legal environment.  

As an independent agent, Ohio Supreme Court elections are arguably the most important state elections to your policyholders, profession, and business. Supreme Court decisions can influence litigation trends, liability exposure, insurance costs, and the broader business climate for years to come. This year, two seats on the bench are up for election: Justice Dan Hawkins is running to retain his seat on the highest court against Common Pleas Judge Marilyn Zayas and former Judge Colleen O’Donnell is challenging incumbent Justice Jennifer Brunner. 

In this article, we will detail the importance of the Supreme Court elections, explaining why you should consider supporting OIA’s endorsed Justice candidates and examine the devastating impact of having an activist court.

What Is at Stake?

The Ohio Supreme Court is comprised of seven justices that serve as the final arbiter of legal questions concerning the constitutionality and validity of our states’ laws, rules and legal system. These justices are elected to six-year terms with an age limit for serving on the court at 70 years old. The philosophical view of the court is incredibly tied to the outcome of these elections.  

Two years ago, Ohio could have moved back toward being an activist court, putting the state’s stable civil justice system, predictable insurance marketplace and pro-business legal climate at risk. At the time, the court was comprised of four justices rooted in judicial restraint with three justices who trended toward judicial activism. With three judicial candidates on the ballot, just one loss could have shifted the balance of the Supreme Court.  

For that election in 2024, our political action committee (OIAPAC) invested considerable resources into supporting the three candidates who believe in judicial restraint: Meghan Shanahan, Joe Deeters, and Dan Hawkins.

Instead of backsliding to an activist court, voters elected those three jurists who practice judicial restraint, strict constructionism and deference to the legislature on policy issues. Those victories solidified the Court as a six to one majority grounded in judicial restraint.  

In the 2026 election, Ohio voters have an opportunity to further impact the judicial philosophy of Ohio’s highest court. Justice Hawkins is seeking reelection this year after winning a special election in 2024 to fill a vacant seat. Justice Brunner is the last remaining jurist who has a more activist tilt. If Colleen O’Donnell prevails over Justice Brunner and Justice Hawkins holds onto his seat, Ohio will have a court of seven Justices who practice strict constructionism.  

OIAPAC has endorsed Colleen O’Donnell and Justice Hawkins in the 2026 election. We believe these candidates will strengthen the highest court in our state.  

Supporting Justice Hawkins and Colleen O’Donnell

You might be wondering why supporting Justice Hawkins and Colleen O’Donnell is important. OIAPAC has a strong track record of supporting judicial candidates who embrace judicial restraint and strict constructionism. These are judges who focus their legal opinions on the constitutionality of Ohio’s laws and defer policy decisions to the legislative branch rather than creating policy from the bench. 

Through our review process, we have determined that it is important to continue supporting Justice Hawkins. During his time on the Ohio Supreme Court, he has demonstrated the qualities of an excellent jurist and a commitment to applying the law as written. Additionally, we believe that Colleen O’Donnell would bring a perspective that is more advantageous to protect the interests of Ohio’s independent insurance agents and the broader insurance industry than her opponent, Justice Brunner. 

To support these efforts, OIAPAC recently hosted a fundraiser and Ohio Supreme Court reception in support of Justice Hawkins and Colleen O’Donnell.

The event provided a valuable opportunity for agents to engage directly with these judicial leaders and learn more about their judicial philosophies.

The opportunity to strengthen the Ohio Supreme Court is not something we take lightly. OIA and its members understand the impact a court can have on Ohio’s legal and business environment. We also understand the consequences that can result when the court takes a more activist approach to judicial decision-making. It is critical that we do not revert to the Ohio Supreme Court of the late 90s and early 2000s that put out legal opinions that drastically impacted the insurance industry in our state.

Scott-Pontzer Case (Scott-Pontzer v. Liberty Mutual, 1999)

In the not-so-distant past, Ohio had a court that’s activist decisions had devastating impacts on the insurance system and business community in our state. If you were an independent agent in the late 90s and the early 2000s, you are likely to know about the sting of the Scott Pontzer case on commercial liability policies in our state.  

The Pontzer case centered around the unfortunate passing of Christopher Pontzer. He was killed in an auto accident where the other driver was at fault. At the time of the incident, the victim was driving his own personal vehicle for non-work purposes. His widow sought underinsured motorist benefits under his employer’s corporate insurance policies.  

This case brought up an important question: Is an employee considered insured when they are under a commercial auto policy, even when they are not doing company business or on the clock and driving their own personal vehicle?  

The activist Supreme Court ruled in favor of the employee’s estate. The court ruled that the coverage was not limited to accidents occurring during the employees’ work duties and greatly expanded how much a commercial policy could cover.  

The implications of this case were devastating to the insurance space in Ohio and led to a huge influx in liability exposure for insurers and for businesses in our state.  

This decision was ultimately limited following a Supreme Court case in 2003 that changed the application of UM/UIM commercial auto coverage to apply to an individual within the scope of their employment.  

Since the end of the Scott-Pontzer era rulings that plagued Ohio’s judicial system, Ohioans have benefited from economic growth and prosperity without the threat of nuclear verdicts, outrageous legal claims and excessive legal expenses.

Preserving a Predictable Legal Climate

While agents may not all share the same political views, they do share the same underlying values and passion for protecting the independent agency system so that Ohioans have a choice in coverage that meets their unique insurance needs.  

As your advocates, we encourage you to strongly consider supporting Justice Dan Hawkins and Colleen O’Donnell in November’s election. Maintaining an Ohio Supreme Court that stands for the rule of law and doesn’t bend to the political and societal whims of the day has allowed Ohio to have an insurance industry that is envied by other states across the country.

Please reach out to George Christy at george@ohioinsuranceagents.com or at (614) 929-8237 with any questions on this upcoming election or OIA’s advocacy efforts.