As part of our commitment to providing you with what you need to make an informed decision in the 2026 elections, News 6 joined with the News Collaborative of Central Florida to present the Voting Central Florida 2026 Voter’s Guide.
Tuesday, Aug. 18 is the Florida Statewide Primary election, a mix of party primaries and nonpartisan local elections, such as school board races, judicial races, and county commission races in some counties.
Recommended Videos
[ELECTION 2026: Make sure you’re eligible to vote|How to vote by mail|Election Myths]
Florida has a closed primary system, which means only members of a political party may vote in party primaries. To be eligible, a voter had to identify with that party by July 20.
However, judicial races and local races, for the most part, are open to all registered voters, regardless of political party.
Everything you need to know in order to vote in the Aug. 18 Statewide Primary, including how to vote by mail, vote early, and vote on Election Day, can be found in our Election 2026 section HERE.
9th Circuit Judge – Group 1 candidates
The 9th Judicial Circuit of Florida handles state civil and criminal cases for Orange and Osceola counties. These are nonpartisan races, open to all voters.
Of the 22 groups up for election this year, Group 1, Group 2, and Group 31 drew more than one candidate.
You can read about the Group 2 race HERE.
You can read about the Group 31 race HERE.
The News Collaborative of Central Florida created a list of common questions to ask the candidates. Questionnaires were sent to all candidates.
Not all of the candidates responded. Where candidates did not respond, we have filled out the information to the best of our abilities.
Our News Collaborative partners at Vox Populi compiled the candidate responses for the 9th Circuit Court race. Below is an excerpt of each candidate’s profile.
Temika Hampton-Johnson
WEBSITE: hamptonjohnson4judge.vote/
What professional experiences have best prepared you for the bench?
I think everything in my professional life has prepared me for that because you need so many qualities. I think it’s safe to say every person who’s running for judge meets the minimum qualifications — they have the education, the background, etc. So what else can you bring that we need? For me, I think my background has helped me most in that my temperament, my demeanor, it’s not in theory. It’s been a working thing.
I mentioned I worked in probation and parole the last five years, of which I solely supervised sex offenders, and what I will tell you is, though I may not agree with the offense, it was not personal for me when that person came into my office. I’d ask, “What are your orders? Are you in compliance with your orders?” That’s it. Each one will tell you they were always treated with respect by me. Being personal didn’t enter into our interactions. Same as a public defender, you don’t pick your clients and I’ve had clients whose personal beliefs did not agree with mine. I’ve had clients who didn’t want me as their lawyer because of my race, but I still represented them, and I still showed up. I still did my job protecting their constitutional right without taking it personal, without bringing my personal opinion or my personal feelings into it, so I think that’s why I say everything in my background has prepared me.
Another thing, I also think having that real-life experience…dealing with regular everyday people, those are the people we see in court often who don’t have an attorney, and those are the ones who we need to restore their belief in our judicial system. I think my background has shown that I’m capable of doing that and exhibiting those behaviors that are necessary to help to restore that trust.
What role should personal values play in judicial decision-making?
Your personal values should not play any role — that’s not your job. My job as a judge is to just apply the law and whatever controlling precedent fairly and efficiently. My personal opinion doesn’t matter and, like I said, that’s not me speaking in theory; that’s me in practice. Most people, when I tell them what I did as a probation officer, they’re like, “How could you do that?” Because it’s not my job. I wasn’t on the jury. It wasn’t my job to judge them. My job was to make sure they complied with their orders…That’s it. Follow the law. They’re not my friends; I’m just doing my job, but they would never tell you that they were treated in an unfair way.
How do you balance precedent with evolving societal standards?
As a judge, you’re obligated to apply the law and follow any binding precedent. However, that can’t be done with just tunnel vision. You’ve got to understand the facts, the circumstances, and, truthfully, the reality facing the people.
If a father loses his driver’s license in criminal court, it impacts his ability to pay child support and family. So, if I’m in criminal court and you come before me, and this is a factor that’s brought up, these are [extenuating] circumstances. There are other mitigating factors. So maybe there’s an option of them doing community service, maybe we’re looking at something where this person can keep their driver’s license because we do see the long-term effect of it now. If it’s a situation where it’s a mandatory suspension, whether it’s a DUI or something like that, there’s nothing I can do about that.
But where there is leeway and there is some room for the judge to navigate some things, I think we need to look at those alternatives, and that’s part of looking at the big picture. It’s not just tunnel vision, where you say “You didn’t pay your fine, your license is suspended, now pay your fine, move on.” Well, [my question is] why didn’t you pay the fine? What’s the circumstances here?
…[You need to apply] justice with integrity. That means each person, when you’re coming in, you’re applying the law fairly. I’m consistent, and there’s no favoritism, no outside influences. It’s treating that person that’s in the courtroom with dignity and respect, regardless of their background or resources, whether they have money or don’t have money.
What steps do you take to avoid conflicts of interest?
The main thing I’ve been talking about is restoring public faith and trust in the judicial system. So you want to make sure at every opportunity you’re avoiding even the appearance of a conflict.
For example, I’ve been asked before [about the support for my campaign] because you’ll hear, “Well, people know you, but your name’s not said a lot, or these people support you, but they’re not openly supporting you,” or whatever the case may be. Because a lot of times when you’re applying for appointment as judge, it’s more about who knows you, who’s recommending you, those sort of different things. The truth is…I get the job done. Every person you talk to about me, they had nothing but positive things to say. However, no one has done anything to advance me, which also means I don’t owe anybody anything when I get there, and that’s where a lot of conflicts come from.
Now, I can’t think of many conflicts that I would have but if there’s one that exists, I have no problem acknowledging it and recusing myself from that case…If someone walks in, and I believe it’s a conflict, I’m gonna’ go ahead and say it ahead of time. I’m not trying to hide anything, and I think that’s part of my military ethical background of allowing people to make informed decisions.
What barriers to justice do you see in the current system, and how would you address them?
As far as people having access to court, if there are things that we can do virtually and the parties feel comfortable and it’s legally allowed, let’s do that. Let’s not drag people down to court if we don’t have to, right? It just saves time, saves resources, and it’s actually more efficient for the docket to help move it forward, but also wanting people to feel comfortable enough doing that, not forcing it, but giving them that option where we can.
I also think [having more knowledge about the court process] is important, doing more for knowing your rights, or general information sessions being provided for people. I know they have the self-help center in the civil department, if you come down to the courthouse, but maybe some things like with public libraries where you do information sessions. In my past, I’ve done quite a few know your rights workshops. There’s still people who need help processing that. One of the things I do right now is volunteer with the Florida Rights Restoration Collective, helping them to file those cases where we’re converting people’s court costs to community service, so we help get their rights restored. I’m doing a resource fair in Seminole County, and I know a lot of people are like, why are you doing stuff in Seminole? You’re not campaigning in Seminole. But it’s not necessarily about the race, it’s about what I believe in doing, and it’s about getting information to people.
I just feel like the more information people have, the more we can help to restore public trust, because when you understand things better, you can reconcile it in your mind, even when it doesn’t go your way… But we also need to provide some resources to help people to understand and navigate the court system, because it is difficult. It’s not easy. Even now as an attorney, I will say it’s not easy. Each judge has their own procedures in each courtroom, so we as attorneys know to go look at the judge’s procedures. However, the everyday citizen coming in may not, but that’s the kind of information in those sessions we can give them.
Charles Hart
WEBSITE: www.votecharleshart.com/
NOTE: Mr. Hart did not respond to our request to fill out the questionnaire. We have put together a brief background piece.
Private practice attorney and former chair of the Orange County Republican Executive Committee Charles Hart is running for the Group 1 seat on the Ninth Circuit Court.
He is challenging incumbent Judge Mikaela Nix (a fellow Republican) and private practice attorney Temika Hampton-Johnson in the nonpartisan Aug. 18 election. Circuit Court judges serve six-year terms and earn $200,836 annually. The Ninth Circuit serves both Orange and Osceola counties.
“As judge, I would work to ensure that every person who appears before the court is treated with courtesy, patience, and respect,” Hart states on his campaign website. “I believe the courtroom belongs to the public, and the judicial system should be accessible, efficient, and responsive to the needs of the community.”
A member of the Federalist Society and a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association, Hart has applied five times to the Ninth Circuit Court’s Judicial Nomination Commission and once to the Seventh Judicial Circuit for circuit and county court positions in 2019, 2023, 2024 and 2025. He’s never made it past the commission.
Hart has worked as an assistant state attorney and as a public defender for the 18th Judicial Circuit, which comprises Brevard and Seminole counties. He has also maintained a Sanford-based private practice, the Charles C. Hart Law Office, where he specializes in criminal and guardianship law and continues to practice today. A certified Florida Supreme Court family law and county court mediator, Hart opened a mediation practice earlier this year.
In 2022, Hart ran for the Florida House of Representatives in District 39. He was defeated in the Republican Primary by State Rep. Doug Bankson of Apopka.
Hart taught accounting at the University of South Florida’s School of Accounting and Santa Fe Community College during his graduate school and law school years. In his application for a vacancy on the Seventh Circuit’s County Court, he noted that his courses on accounting contained “no critical race theory [or] distortionist history lessons …”
Hart is also known for filing a lawsuit against Orange County’s mask mandate at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, telling Florida Politics at the time that Orange County Mayor Jerry L. Deming’s maneuver to stem the flood of cases and protect public health was a “massive government overreach” and a free speech violation.
Hart did not submit responses to the News Collaborative of Central Florida’s candidate questionnaire.
Mikaela Nix - Incumbent
WEBSITE: judgenix2026.com/
What professional experiences have best prepared you for the bench? As a Ninth Circuit judge for nearly six years, I bring a unique combination of professional experience, character, leadership, and perspective to the bench. I understand how the law operates in practice, having worked with diverse individuals across varied circumstances. I am deeply committed to ethical conduct, maintaining integrity, impartiality, and treating everyone with fairness and dignity. Recognizing that courtrooms are emotional environments, I make difficult decisions calmly and respectfully. I have a passion for law and justice, a commitment to community service, and the temperament necessary to be an effective judge. As one of the first African American women to win a contested judicial race in the Ninth Circuit, I believe judicial independence is essential to justice and democracy.
At my core, I have an unwavering commitment to justice, fairness, and the rule of law. While a law degree opens the door to judiciary, it is character, wisdom, discipline, and dedication to service that determine fitness for the bench. I am committed to serving Orange and Osceola County residents with integrity and compassion, as I often encounter people during their most challenging moments. No defining moment in my courtroom should be handled with anything less than complete dignity, respect, and compassion, regardless of the outcome.
A lawyer knows the law and how to apply it. A judge must know not only the law but also people, principles, human nature, and fairness.
What role should personal values play in judicial decision-making? Judicial decisions should be guided primarily, fundamentally, and consistently by the law itself, rather than by the judges’ personal values, beliefs, moral convictions, political ideologies, or individual preferences and inclinations. This critically important principle and foundational concept of judicial independence can be effectively and reliably accomplished by deciding cases based on the best available evidence presented during proceedings, careful and thorough assessment of witness credibility and reliability, well-established constitutional principles and frameworks that have been developed over time, and both the mandatory and persuasive precedent that has been set by previous court decisions at various levels of the judicial system. Personal values, individual biases, subjective opinions, preconceived notions, and external pressures should not play any role whatsoever in judicial decision-making processes or influence the outcomes of cases in any manner.
The judiciary must maintain strict objectivity in their analysis and reasoning, demonstrate complete impartiality in their considerations and deliberations, and ensure fair, equal, and consistent treatment to all parties who come before the court, regardless of their background, status, or circumstances. This commitment to neutrality and adherence to legal principles serves as the cornerstone of public trust and confidence in the judicial system and helps preserve the integrity and legitimacy of the rule of law in our society.
How do you balance precedent with evolving societal standards? The legal system balances precedent with evolving societal standards through a concept known as flexible stare decisis, which allows courts to follow past rulings while leaving room to adapt to modern realities.
That question strikes at the very heart of judicial philosophy and the tension inherent in maintaining a stable legal framework while acknowledging the dynamic nature of our society. My approach is rooted in the fundamental principle that judicial decisions must be guided primarily, fundamentally, and consistently by the law itself, rather than by personal values or subjective inclinations. Precedent, or *stare decisis*, is not merely a suggestion; it is the cornerstone of judicial independence and the rule of law, ensuring predictability and fairness.
However, precedent is not static. It is interpreted through the lens of established constitutional principles and frameworks that have developed over time. When societal standards evolve, the role of the judiciary is not to unilaterally impose new moral codes, but rather to assess whether the existing legal precedent remains consistent with the foundational, enduring constitutional structures. This involves careful and thorough assessment of the established law, mandatory and persuasive precedent, and ensuring that any application remains strictly objective and impartial. The law must be applied to the facts presented, with complete dignity, respect, and compassion for all parties, recognizing that wisdom and character, not mere preference, determine fitness for the bench.
What steps do you take to avoid conflicts of interest? To avoid conflict and maintain harmonious interactions in both my personal and professional life, I make it a priority to consistently follow the Laws of Impeccable Communications:
Be Mindful of Your Attitude.
Communicate openly, clearly, and honestly, expressing your thoughts and feelings in a straightforward manner that leaves no room for misunderstanding or confusion.
Treat the person with respect, dignity, and consideration regardless of the situation.
Watch the tone of your voice to ensure it conveys the right message and doesn’t inadvertently escalate tensions.
Be compassionate and patient, understanding that everyone has their own struggles and perspectives that shape how they see the world and respond to different situations.
Despite our best efforts and intentions to the contrary, you are sometimes forced to deal with challenging relationships and difficult people. As challenging as it is, dealing with a difficult person can be a valuable learning experience.
What barriers to justice do you see in the current system, and how would you address them? The persistent and deeply concerning problem of overcrowded court dockets and the resulting significant delays in the administration of justice can be meaningfully and effectively addressed through several carefully considered strategic interventions and reforms, including substantially increasing the number of qualified judges and judicial officers to handle the ever-growing case volumes more efficiently and expeditiously, significantly expanding the availability and widespread use of virtual hearings, remote proceedings, and digital courtroom technologies to improve accessibility for all parties and reduce scheduling conflicts and logistical barriers, implementing and deploying upgraded and sophisticated case management software systems along with comprehensive and ongoing training programs for all court personnel and administrative staff to ensure proper utilization, establishing specialized fast-track divisions and dedicated courtrooms specifically designed to handle certain case types and categories more expeditiously and with greater focus, and hiring additional qualified and certified interpreters to adequately serve the diverse and expanding linguistic needs of participants in civil litigation, family law proceedings, probate matters, and other judicial processes.