The Constitutional Gray Area of Authority: Supreme Court Nomination Clash Breaks Convention... What Will Lee Choose?

Chief Justice Jo Hee-dae Submits Written Recommendation Without Prior Coordination
Blue House: "Unprecedented Unilateral Notification... Carefully Considering Our Response"
If Accepted, Sets Precedent for 'Nomination Without Agreement'; If Rejec

The first Supreme Court Justice appointment under the Lee Jae-myung administration has evolved beyond concerns over the candidate's qualifications into a full-fledged controversy surrounding the constitutional powers of President Lee and Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae. After Chief Justice Cho recommended Sohn Bong-gi, Senior Judge at the Daegu District Court, without reaching a final agreement with the Blue House, the presidential office is now even considering returning Sohn's nomination. All eyes are on whether the Blue House will accept Chief Justice Cho's 'nomination without consensus,' or set a new precedent by the President 'rejecting the nomination.'

President Lee Jae-myung is greeting Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae ahead of the meeting with four key figures held at the Blue House on the 8th. June 8, 2026. Photo by Yonhap News Agency

The conflict dates back to January of this year. On January 21, the Supreme Court Justice Candidate Recommendation Committee recommended four individuals—including Kim Min-gi (Appellate Judge at Suwon High Court), Park Soon-young (Appellate Judge at Seoul High Court), Sohn Bong-gi (Senior Judge at Daegu District Court), and Yoon Sung-sik (Senior Judge at Seoul High Court)—out of 39 candidates for the position to succeed Justice Noh Tae-ak. Chief Justice Cho planned to consult public and court opinions and recommend one candidate to President Lee by January 26.

However, the Blue House and the Supreme Court could not find common ground regarding the final candidate. It is reported that the Blue House considered Judge Kim as their top choice, given the symbolism of being President Lee's first Supreme Court Justice appointment. The Supreme Court, however, was reluctant because Judge Kim's spouse is Oh Young-joon, a Constitutional Court justice appointed by the President after Lee’s administration took office. They also suggested Park, another female candidate, as an alternative, but consensus was not reached.

As the selection process stalled, Justice Noh retired without a successor on March 3. Even though over 40 days had passed since the candidates were shortlisted, no recommendation had been made. Differences between the two sides persisted, and as a result, the position to succeed Noh Tae-ak remained vacant for more than five months.

Discussions regarding the appointments regained momentum as the September 7 retirement of Justice Lee Heung-ku approached. On August 4, the candidate recommendation committee recommended four individuals, including Kim Moon-gwan (Chief Judge at Busan District Court), Kim Sung-soo (Senior Judge at Seoul High Court), Kim Ye-young (Senior Judge at Seoul Southern District Court), and Kim Jung-joong (Senior Judge at Gwangju District Court), as candidates to succeed Lee. Chief Justice Cho remarked at the time, "Together, we will do our best going forward." There was speculation that a simultaneous recommendation for both Noh Tae-ak and Lee Heung-ku’s successors would offer a solution.

No Kyung-pil, who was appointed as Chief Justice of the National Court Administration on July 14, claimed to have held four to five rounds of discussions with the Blue House. During these talks, there was even consideration of restarting the candidate recommendation process for Noh Tae-ak's successor from scratch, but this was abandoned due to opposition from some candidates. Ultimately, on August 18, Chief Justice Cho simultaneously recommended Judge Sohn for Noh Tae-ak’s seat and Judge Kim Sung-soo for Lee Heung-ku’s seat—a full 209 days after the candidate for Noh’s position had first been recommended.

Written notice to the Blue House without consensus or a meeting... Unprecedented controversy in the nomination process

Yonhap News Agency

The controversy has grown less over the candidate than the process itself. Traditionally, the selection process for Supreme Court justices consisted of consensus between the Chief Justice of the National Court Administration and the Blue House Senior Secretary for Civil Affairs, followed by the Chief Justice meeting the President in person to express intent and submit a written recommendation. This time, however, without a final agreement, the court administration informed the Blue House on August 18 of its intention to nominate Judge Sohn, and Chief Justice Cho submitted the written recommendation around 3 p.m. the same day and made this public.

The Supreme Court claims that, although no agreement was reached, there was consultation. Chief Justice No stated at the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee, "We consulted until the last minute but could not reach a consensus." In contrast, the Blue House asserts that the recommendation was pushed through before discussions on the final candidate concluded. Regarding the controversy over submitting the nomination in writing, the Supreme Court claims the President did not give an opportunity for a meeting. However, the Blue House insists that it never received a formal meeting request, escalating the dispute even further.

The Blue House has been unable to hide its displeasure. In an interview on the 21st, Sung Ki-hong, Senior Secretary for Public Communication, characterized the court’s process as a "unilateral notification that bypassed the consultation process." He also stated, "We are carefully considering (what decision to make) by reviewing precedents and conventions since 1987 as well as legal aspects." Unlike Kim, whose nomination was processed through mutual agreement, it is understood that the Blue House is contemplating several options regarding Sohn—including declining to forward the nomination to the National Assembly and instead requesting a re-nomination.

The key issue: 'Legal obligation vs. custom'... Implications for future rules on Supreme Court appointments

President Lee Jae-myung is speaking at the 1st Anti-Corruption Policy Council of the People's Sovereignty Government held at the Blue House on the 21st. The Anti-Corruption Policy Council, a ministerial meeting of anti-corruption-related agencies to comprehensively promote the government's anti-corruption measures, was held for the first time since President Lee took office on that day. 2026.8.21 Yonhap News Agency

The crux of the matter lies in the precedent of informal prior coordination filling the constitutional 'gray area' regarding the limits of authority. Article 104 of the Constitution stipulates that "Supreme Court justices are appointed by the President with the consent of the National Assembly upon the recommendation of the Chief Justice." Nowhere does it state that the President and Chief Justice must agree beforehand. On the other hand, there is also no provision stating that the President may return or request a new nomination.

However, some point out that neither side should unilaterally wield its constitutional authority in a way that renders the other’s powers ineffective. If the President arbitrarily rejects a nomination, it undermines the Chief Justice's power of recommendation. Conversely, if the Chief Justice exercises the nomination right without regard for the President’s wishes, it may strip the President’s appointment power of substance. The prior coordination before formal recommendation has been interpreted as a mechanism to avoid such a direct clash of powers.

In practice, both the President and the Chief Justice have previously used prior consensus as a way to prevent conflict over Supreme Court nominations. For example, in 2003 under the Roh Moo-hyun administration, although there was friction between the Blue House and Chief Justice Choi Jong-young over the pool of candidates, Chief Justice Choi proposed Kim Yong-dam, Chief Judge at the Gwangju High Court, and President Roh accepted this, thereby averting a head-on confrontation.

If the Blue House accepts Sohn’s nomination and forwards it to the National Assembly, it would mark the first time a nomination proceeded without final agreement between the President and Chief Justice. On the other hand, if the nomination is returned, it would set a precedent for the President’s effective rejection of the Chief Justice’s formal recommendation.

The impact of this decision could be far-reaching given the scale of upcoming Supreme Court appointments. Under the revised Courts Organization Act promulgated in March, the number of Supreme Court justices, currently 14, will increase by four each year from 2028, reaching 26 in 2030. Including the 12 new positions and replacements for sitting justices retiring during President Lee's term, he will have the authority to appoint up to 22 justices in total.

A ruling party official commented, "It is difficult to view this appointment simply as an issue concerning a single candidate. The procedures and principles established now will inevitably shape how the President and Chief Justice negotiate appointments in the era of expanded Supreme Court seats."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.