Larkin E. Walsh
Non-Partisan | Kansas
Candidate Profile
Moderate
BIOGRAPHY
EDUCATION
Candidate did not provide
WORK & MILITARY
Candidate did not provide
AFFILIATIONS
Candidate did not provide
POLITICAL OFFICES HELD
Candidate did not provide
POLITICAL OFFICES SOUGHT
Candidate did not provide
OTHER INFORMATION
In State v. Allen (2026), in which Justice Walsh wrote a dissent, the Kansas Supreme Court considered whether Allen’s right to a lawyer was violated when he represented himself during a competency hearing without properly giving up that right. The majority found a constitutional violation but said it did not affect the outcome of the case, so Allen was not entitled to a new trial. Walsh disagreed. He said the violation was serious because Allen was left without a lawyer at an important stage of the case, and a later hearing could not fix that mistake. Walsh would have reversed Allen’s conviction and required a new trial, meaning his position would have given Allen another chance to defend himself with proper legal representation.
In Savage v. Timsah (2026), in which Justice Walsh wrote the opinion of the Court, the Supreme Cout of Kansas considered whether property owners could recover their attorney fees as damages after a neighbor falsely denied their easement rights. The Court held that they could not. Walsh explained that Kansas generally requires each side to pay its own legal fees unless a law, contract, or special third-party situation allows otherwise. Because none applied here, the Court overturned the $33,165 attorney-fee award. The ruling means the property owners kept their easement and won the slander-of-title claim, but they could not make the neighbor pay the legal fees from this lawsuit.
In Kelly v. Kobach (2026), in which Justice Walsh joined the majority and wrote a separate concurrence, the Kansas Supreme Court considered whether Governor Laura Kelly could challenge Attorney General Kris Kobach’s claim that he had exclusive control over litigation involving state executive agencies. The Court dismissed the case without deciding who actually has that power, finding that the parties’ positions had narrowed enough that there was no longer a dispute the Court could properly decide. Walsh agreed, stressing that the Court should not decide a constitutional question that was not properly before it. He also warned that if the parties’ disagreement continues, a future case could lead to a different result.
In State v. Yeargin-Charles (2025), in which Justice Walsh joined the majority, the Kansas Supreme Court considered whether police had a legal reason to stop a car because its license plate was hanging at an angle and moving in the wind. The Court held that the stop was valid because Kansas law requires license plates to be securely fastened, even when the plate can still be easily read. The Court therefore allowed the drug evidence found during the stop to be used and left Yeargin-Charles’ convictions in place.
QUESTIONNAIRE
RIGHT TO LIFE
Was Dobbs v. Jackson rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: In Dobbs, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the federal constitution does not confer a right to abortion.)
Did not answer
Does the federal Constitution support the right to physician assisted suicide? Please explain in light of Washington v. Glucksberg (1997).
Did not answer
Human life deserves legal protection from conception until natural death.
Did not answer
How do you view the judiciary’s role in matters of abortion regulation following Dobbs?
Did not answer
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
Do you believe religious liberty is at risk in the United States. If so, what is the judiciary's proper role in addressing this issue?
Did not answer
Does the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment require government to be strictly secular or does it allow for the nation's religious heritage?
Did not answer
Was Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: The U.S. Supreme Court held tha the state may not show religious hostility when enforcing anti-discrimination laws against a business owner.)
Did not answer
VALUES
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
Did not answer
What is your understanding of parental rights under the Constitution regarding the upbringing of children, particularly regarding choices about education and sexual identity?
Did not answer
Is gender identity a protected class under the Constitution? Please explain the constitutional basis for your view.
Did not answer
ABOUT YOU
Have you ever been convicted of a felony? If so, please explain.
Did not answer
Have you ever been penalized for sexual misconduct in either civil or criminal court? If so, please explain.
Did not answer
I voted in these primaries and general elections:
Did not answer
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
Describe your judicial philosophy.
Did not answer
Do you believe judges should primarily apply the law according to its original public meaning, or do you believe the law evolves over time to reflect contemporary values?
Did not answer
Which current or past U.S. Supreme Court justice best reflects your judicial philosophy?
Did not answer
Was Obergefell v. Hodges rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: The U.S. Supreme Court held Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses create a right for same-sex couples to marry.)
Did not answer
A. How should a judge approach a case where the constitutional or statutory text is clear on its face? B. Conversely, how should a judge proceed when the text is ambiguous or silent on a disputed issue?
Did not answer
What is your view of judicial restraint versus judicial activism? How do you define each?
Did not answer
What is the proper role of a judge?
Did not answer
When applying or interpreting the text of a statute or constitutional provision, is it ever proper for a judge to consider present day public opinion or consequences?
Did not answer
If precedent departs from the Constitution’s text or original meaning, should a judge follow it or correct the error? Please explain.
Did not answer
CRIMINAL JUSTICE & PUBLIC SAFETY
The burden of proof in a criminal case is generally that the state must provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Some say the reason the burden of proof is so high is because we greatly value ensuring that the innocent are not unjustly imprisoned. Please comment on this topic.
Did not answer
When reviewing wrongful conviction claims, what role, if any, should judges play in determining remedies?
Did not answer
2ND AMENDMENT
What is your understanding of the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms?
Did not answer
OTHER IMPORTANT ISSUES
Which branch of government do you believe was intended to wield the most authority?
Did not answer
