Litigation

ACS Panel Debates Judicial Elections, Caperton

By Alexandra Saaverda

As part of its annual conference, the American Constitution Society on Saturday held a panel discussion on how the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Caperton v. Massey will affect judicial elections. According to a Washington Legal Times blog, the panel debated the pros and cons of various options, unable to reach a single solution.

Justice at Stake?s Bert Brandenburg provided the panel with statistical data, noting that ?almost half of state judges agree that campaign cash is affecting the outcome of cases.?

But how much is too much? Former Colorado Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Kourlis, who is executive director of the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System, argued that merely asking that question implies that there is an amount that is acceptable, which she believes there is not. Kourlis advocates the use of nonpartisan nomination commissions to screen and submit potential court nominees. According to the Amerian Judicature Society, Colorado is one of 24 states to use this system, also known as merit selection.

That option was criticized by former Alabama Supreme Court Justice Harold See Jr., who said that public participation in the election of judges carries an important value.

Judge James Wynn Jr. of the North Carolina Supreme Court, who is a member of Justice at Stake’s board of directors, offered another option: public financing of judicial elections. This option would prevent interest groups from having a disproportionate influence on the election?s outcome, Wynn said.

Judge Jon Tigar of Alameda County Superior Court in California added that if donations are considered acceptable, then a solid limit on the amount of money donated needs to be established. The Supreme Court ruling did not include any set limit, saying instead that “disproportionate” influence by an individual donor with a case before a particular judge might create an unacceptable “probability of bias.”

To learn more about the Caperton case, see these Gavel Grab entries, or visit Justice at Stake’s online Caperton resource page.

Full post as published by The Gavel on June 22, 2009 (boomark / email).