Justice of the Supreme Court
Full term commencing 1/2/2027; vote for 1; 6-year term. Judicial candidates run without party labels on the general ballot but are nominated in partisan primaries; parties below are the nominating party per the BOE list.
Candidate list checked 2026-10-11 against Ashtabula County BOECandidates (2)
Candidate statements, official records, and guide summaries are labeled below. A linked source identifies the basis for that specific claim; a pending label means the claim has not yet been individually checked.
Compare all 2 candidates side by sideOpen comparison
Each candidate is shown in the same column so you can scan their backgrounds, statements, records, and sourced views in one place. On a small screen, scroll the table sideways.
About ballot issue views: A candidate's stated position appears only when we have a source for it. An empty entry means this guide has not added a sourced statement; it does not mean the candidate is undecided.
| Compare | Jennifer Brunner Democrat Incumbent | Colleen O'Donnell Republican |
|---|---|---|
| Background | Ohio Supreme Court justice since January 2021. The court biography lists prior service on the Tenth District Court of Appeals and Franklin County Common Pleas Court, where she founded the adult felony drug court, and as Ohio Secretary of State. Supreme Court of Ohio: Justice Jennifer Brunner biography Evidence type: official record · The Supreme Court biography lists Brunner’s judicial and Secretary of State service. | Her campaign biography lists service as a Franklin County Common Pleas judge, a U.S. immigration judge, an Assistant Ohio Attorney General, and a federal law clerk. These career details are attributed to the campaign. Colleen O’Donnell for Ohio Supreme Court Evidence type: candidate statement · Career history is presented in the candidate’s campaign biography and has not been independently checked in this profile. |
| Campaign statements |
|
|
| Voting record |
|
No voting record summary listed. |
| Stated views on ballot issues |
No source-backed candidate statement on a ballot issue has been added to this guide. |
No source-backed candidate statement on a ballot issue has been added to this guide. |
| Research sources |
Jennifer Brunner Democrat Incumbent
Photo: CC BY 2.0 via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Brunner
View Jennifer Brunner’s candidate profile and sources
Background
Ohio Supreme Court justice since January 2021. The court biography lists prior service on the Tenth District Court of Appeals and Franklin County Common Pleas Court, where she founded the adult felony drug court, and as Ohio Secretary of State. Supreme Court of Ohio: Justice Jennifer Brunner biography Evidence type: official record · The Supreme Court biography lists Brunner’s judicial and Secretary of State service.
Campaign Promises & Positions
- Her campaign describes justice as fairness, equality, and respect for all people. Justice Jennifer Brunner campaign Evidence type: candidate statement · The campaign states this value and approach.
Voting Record
- State v. Lash, 2026-Ohio-2746: dissented from the majority’s conclusion that citing a statutory reason sufficiently explained denial of a postconviction DNA-testing application; Brunner argued the order should explain its application of the statutory criteria. Supreme Court of Ohio: State v. Lash, 2026-Ohio-2746 Evidence type: official record · The opinion identifies Brunner’s dissent and explains the disagreement about the trial court’s reasons for denying DNA testing.
- Wilkes v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 2026-Ohio-3897: dissented from the Court’s decision granting ODOT discretionary immunity for not installing temporary protective fencing during bridge reconstruction. Supreme Court of Ohio: Wilkes v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 2026-Ohio-3897 Evidence type: official record · The opinion identifies Brunner’s dissent and the majority’s immunity ruling.
Stated Views on Ballot Issues
No source-backed candidate statement on a ballot issue has been added to this guide. That does not mean the candidate is undecided.
Promise vs. Record
These selected opinions show areas where Brunner disagreed with the majority. They are not a complete record or a measure of how she would decide future cases. Supreme Court of Ohio: State v. Lash, 2026-Ohio-2746 · Supreme Court of Ohio: Wilkes v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 2026-Ohio-3897 Evidence type: editorial summary · This guide describes two selected dissents without using them as a proxy for a full judicial record.
Colleen O'Donnell Republican
View Colleen O'Donnell’s candidate profile and sources
Background
Her campaign biography lists service as a Franklin County Common Pleas judge, a U.S. immigration judge, an Assistant Ohio Attorney General, and a federal law clerk. These career details are attributed to the campaign. Colleen O’Donnell for Ohio Supreme Court Evidence type: candidate statement · Career history is presented in the candidate’s campaign biography and has not been independently checked in this profile.
Campaign Promises & Positions
- Her campaign describes her as a constitutional conservative and says she would apply the law as written, protect public safety, and keep partisan politics out of the courthouse. Colleen O’Donnell for Ohio Supreme Court Evidence type: candidate statement · These positions summarize the candidate’s campaign statements.
Stated Views on Ballot Issues
No source-backed candidate statement on a ballot issue has been added to this guide. That does not mean the candidate is undecided.
Promise vs. Record
No selected written trial-court decision authored by O’Donnell is listed here. The published appellate opinion in State ex rel. Mobley v. O’Donnell concerned an oath-of-office filing and was authored by the Tenth District, not O’Donnell; it is not treated as evidence of her broader judicial philosophy. This guide assigns no match score. Tenth District opinion, State ex rel. Mobley v. O’Donnell, 2020-Ohio-251 Evidence type: editorial summary · The official opinion identifies O’Donnell as a respondent in an appellate writ action; the Tenth District authored the decision. It does not provide a selected authored trial-court opinion from which to infer a broader judicial philosophy.