NCJ Number
237441
Journal
Critical Issues in Justice and Politics Volume: 2 Issue: 3 Dated: November 2009 Pages: 1-14
Date Published
November 2009
Length
14 pages
Annotation
This study of Alabama's judicial elections examines the role of money in getting elected, deciding cases once seated, and whether or not efforts to reduce the influence of money are likely to be successful.
Abstract
The recent "Caperton" decision by the Supreme Court held that judges must recuse themselves in cases where they receive significant campaign contributions from parties in a particular case. This decision has added heft to the debate over money in judicial elections at the State level. Without argument, Alabama's judicial elections are a prime case for examining the issue of money and decisions in judicial elections and behavior, respectively. Since 1993, Alabama's Supreme Court candidates have raised and spent more money than candidates in any other State. Onlookers are left to wonder how such a system can promote justice and whether judicial decisions are for sale. This study of Alabama's judicial elections examines the role of money in getting elected, deciding cases once seated, and whether or not efforts to reduce the influence of money are likely to be successful. As such, a basic model of campaign finance in court elections is tested. The recent controversial Exxon decision is briefly analyzed, and the likelihood of success for judicial selection and campaign finance reform efforts. (Published Abstract)