Contestation, Competition, and the Potential for ACCOUNTABILITY in Intermediate APPELLATE COURT ELECTIONS

By Streb, Matthew J.; Frederick, Brian et al. | Judicature, September/October 2007 | Go to article overview

Contestation, Competition, and the Potential for ACCOUNTABILITY in Intermediate APPELLATE COURT ELECTIONS


Streb, Matthew J., Frederick, Brian, LaFrance, Casey, Judicature


Advocates of judicial elections have long held that they are essential if judges are to be held accountable to the public. While several of the founding fathers, including Hamilton, believed that federal judges should be insulated from the public to promote judicial independence, this has not been the predominate view at the state level. Indeed, 39 states have some sort of election mechanism to select at least some of their judges. While organizations such as the American Bar Association and the American Judicature Society have regularly argued against judicial elections, their worries seem to have fallen on deaf ears.1 Polls find that the public strongly supports the election of state judges,2 and attempts to make the judicial selection process less democratic regularly fail.3

Given the fact that judicial elections are here to stay for the foreseeable future, we need to understand whether they function as supporters of judicial elections argue they should. In other words, do judicial elections have the potential to promote accountability? While Hall has addressed this question at the supreme court level, to our knowledge no one has systematically analyzed judicial accountability below the supreme court level.4 In order to fill this empirical void, we examine results for all intermediate appellate court general elections (partisan, nonpartisan, and retention) from 2000-2006. We compare those results to elections for the U.S. House of Representatives and state supreme courts over the same time period.

We find that the chief obstacle to accountability in intermediate appellate elections is to get people to run in the first place. A sizable proportion of intermediate appellate judges do not face any opposition. However, contested intermediate appellate elections look quite similar to those elections for the U.S. House and state supreme courts in terms of the share of the vote won by the incumbent and the number of incumbents who are defeated. Finally, these results confirm the worries of many observers who oppose retention elections because they feel those elections are tantamount to giving judges life-time tenure. Only one intermediate appellate judge was not retained over the period of study and, on average, about 75 percent of the public voted to retain intermediate appellate judges.

Accountability

At the heart of the battle surrounding judicial elections are arguments over judicial accountability and judicial independence. Supporters of judicial elections claim that they are essential to hold judges accountable to the public. For example, Citizens for Judicial Accountability lament the insulation they believe the court system and its judges are afforded, stating:

We believe in the three branches of government Executive, Legislative and Judiciary, each of them with clearly defined responsibilities. However, the judiciary has become a government within a government setting its own rules and laws for judges and lawyers, accountable only to itself under a self regulation, generally with no penalty for acting in contravention of the rules and laws.9

Not everyone agrees. From a normative perspective, opponents argue against judicial elections exactly because they do not want accountabilityor at least do not want judges beholden to the opinions of a fickle public. From an empirical standpoint, these opponents have questioned whether judicial elections actually promote accountability.6 According to Dubois, the lack of accountability promoted by judicial elections is "the most fundamental and damning of the criticisms leveled against popular judicial elections."7

In theory, there would seem to be a great deal of support for the view that judicial elections do not promote accountability. After all, most studies of judicial elections find that voters know almost nothing about the candidates.8 This lack of knowledge is understandable given that until recently judicial candidates were restricted in terms of what they could talk about on the campaign trail, making it difficult for voters to receive quality information about the candidates. …

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

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 ...
Default project is now your active project.
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.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

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

Contestation, Competition, and the Potential for ACCOUNTABILITY in Intermediate APPELLATE COURT ELECTIONS
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
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?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access 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

    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.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.