Thirty years of judicial retention elections: An update
Bradley University, Peoria, Illinois, United States The Social Science Journal
(Impact Factor: 0.4).
01/2000; 37(1):1-17. DOI: 10.1016/S0362-3319(99)00056-7
This article updates prior reports on the empirical patterns and trends in judicial retention elections. The 3,912 elections encompass both major trial court and appellate court elections in ten states for the period from 1964 through 1994. Reported trends include declines in the affirmative vote, rolloff, and voter differentiation among individual judges. Detailed analysis of defeated judges indicates that regular retention voters quickly remove judges from the bench without any negative consequences for other judges on the ballot.
- "First, the average vote for the winning candidate in retention elections is significantly higher than the average vote for the winning candidate in both partisan and nonpartisan elections. Aspin et al. (2000) "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The election of judges has been an enduring, though controversial, institution. While there have been many popular accounts of how these elections are decided by factors irrelevant to a fair and impartial judiciary, recent scholarship has shown that electoral competition in races for the state high court bench can be understood in systematic ways. Yet, while we know the factors that can make races more or less competitive, we lack understanding of the factors that contribute to the electoral defeat of sitting justices. In this paper, I examine the determinants of electoral defeat for all incumbent state supreme court justices who ran for reelection between 1990-2000. Contrary to the arguments of those who claim that judicial elections are decided in a random, nonsystematic manner, I find that the probability of an incumbent being defeated is based on characteristics of the candidates, the state and electoral context, and institutional arrangements.
American Politics Research 09/2007; 33(6). DOI:10.1177/1532673X04273414 · 0.71 Impact Factor
Available from: myazbar.org
Available from: pitt.edu
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: One of the hottest topics in politics today is the method by which state supreme court justices are selected. The debate over whether judges should be appointed or elected (or some combination of both) is raging in several state legislatures, as well as in the media. State supreme court elections have been heavily criticized for the increasing amounts of money that have been raised and spent during campaigns for the state high court bench. In this article, I examine the trends in campaign spending and electoral contests in all contested state supreme court races from 1990 to 2000.
Justice System Journal, The 01/2004; 25(1):21-38. · 0.50 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.