Legitimacy, Yes: But at What Cost?

By Hume, Robert J. | Judicature, March/April 2013 | Go to article overview

Legitimacy, Yes: But at What Cost?


Hume, Robert J., Judicature


Do the costs of judicial elections outweigh the benefits? This essay considers questions about judicial elections that remain unanswered by current research, including the possibility that elected judges are less capable of protecting minority rights.

James Gibson's important new book, Electing Judges, challenges assumptions about judicial elections that have crept into debates on law and policy.1 The book's most immediate task is to rebut claims made by the dissenting justices in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White that judicial campaign activity "inevitably diminishes the public's faith in the ability of judges to administer the law without regard to personal or political self-interest."2

But it is more than a response to White. Gibson also responds to scholars who have sounded "alarm bells" over judicial elections, who fear that judicial elections will diminish public confidence in courts and reduce the public's willingness to comply with their legal obligations. As one such critic put it, "When judicial decisions are seen as politicized rather than independent. ..the sense of fairness and justice that is the binding force of the Rule of Law becomes exhausted and the system is weakened. Disobedience and avoidance of legal obligations can be expected to rise in direct proportion to declining respect for law."3

Gibson responds to these claims as any good social scientist would - with evidence. There is no need to resort to speculation about the effects of judicial elections and judicial campaign activity on legitimacy. These are empirical questions, and the answers are accessible to science. Gibson is to be commended for applying his considerable skills to the task of introducing rigor to a debate that may be premised on false assumptions.

Two of Gibson's findings are particularly noteworthy. First, he demonstrates that citizens have different expectations about the judiciary and that many citizens do not expect (or, indeed, want) judges to be independent or nonpolitical in their decision making. "Not everyone accepts that mechanical jurisprudence constitutes the best form of judging," Gibson concludes; "not everyone accepts that judicial independence is a value trumping all other considerations."4 Legal elites might value independence; but many in the public do not, and Gibson cautions elites not to project their own values and expectations onto the mass public.

Second, he finds that judicial elections, on balance, enhance legitimacy. Gibson acknowledges that certain features of judicial election campaigns, most notably campaign contributions, undermine legitimacy; but the net benefits of elections are positive. "Presumably," Gibson writes, "we care most about whether elections add to or subtract from the legitimacy of courts in toto, not whether a particular ad campaign is churlish."5 Elections benefit courts because "simply being able to vote for judges makes courts more legitimate."6

Together, these findings do much to cast judicial elections in a positive light.7 Minimally, Gibson's work should silence some of the more extravagant claims made about judicial elections made in White and elsewhere. Indeed, his research suggests that elected and appointed courts are comparable in terms of legitimacy. As Gibson notes, "state high courts seem to be as legitimate as the venerable U.S. Supreme Court."8

Still, I remain unconvinced that the benefits of judicial elections outweigh the costs.9 Specifically, I have three questions about the potential consequences for courts if judicial elections were adopted more widely.

Do elections make it harder for judges to function as "republican schoolmasters"?

Much of the recent research on judicial elections has focused on the influence of elections on general levels of public confidence in courts.10 Yet, many of the classic works on legitimacy theory have suggested that courts are not simply resiliently popular institutions, but also "republican schoolmasters," uniquely capable of building the public's support for policy alternatives, particularly on issues relating to civil rights and liberties.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Legitimacy, Yes: But at What Cost?
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.