Litigation

NC Voters: Court Rulings Tilted by Campaign Cash

By Peter Hardin

Campaign contributions to judicial candidates can tilt a case’s outcome in the courtroom, an overwhelming majority of North Carolina voters said in a new poll.

The Justice at Stake Campaign and North Carolina Center for Voter Education, a partner of JAS, commissioned the poll. Released today, the poll had these main findings, according to a joint press release by the groups:

• 94 percent of North Carolina voters said they believe campaign contributions influence a judge’s decision in a case involving the donor. Of those polled, 43 percent say campaign donations can affect a ruling greatly.
• 79 percent of the voters said they think it poses a very serious problem when a candidate for the bench accepts a campaign donation from someone with a case that the judge might have to decide.
• 85 percent said judges should step aside from hearing cases that involve major campaign contributors.
• Regarding the state’s public financing system for judicial elections, 49 percent said they would be less likely to back a candidate for the legislature who wants to get rid of the program. Only 20 percent said they would be more likely to favor such a candidate.

“Trust in the courts is eroded when judges have to dial for dollars from parties who appear before them,” said Bert Brandenburg, JAS executive director. “North Carolina’s public financing is a national model, and this poll confirms that voters want to preserve a program that keeps campaign cash out of the courtroom.”

“This poll shows that North Carolina voters are concerned about the role of money in judicial elections,” said Damon Circosta, executive director of the N.C. voter education group. “Voters believe that giving judicial candidates an alternative to special-interest money to fund their campaigns is key to protecting the integrity of the courts.”

Funding for North Carolina’s program comes chiefly through a voluntary $3 check-off on the state income tax form and a $50 surcharge on dues paid by attorneys to the State Bar.

To learn more about the state’s public financing program, first used in 2004, check out Gavel Grab or visit the JAS issues page on the topic.

Full post as published by The Gavel on February 22, 2011 (boomark / email).