Error loading page.
Try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, there may be a network issue, and you can use our self test page to see what's preventing the page from loading.
Learn more about possible network issues or contact support for more help.

Free to Judge

The Power of Campaign Money in Judicial Elections

ebook
1 of 1 copy available
1 of 1 copy available

The idea that wealthy people use their money to influence things, including politics, law, and media will surprise very few people. However, as Michael S. Kang and Joanna Shepherd argue in this readable and rich study of the state judiciary, the effect of money on judicial outcomes should disturb and anger everyone. In the current system that elects state judges, the rich and powerful can spend money to elect and re-elect judges who decide cases the way they want. Free to Judge is about how and why money increasingly affects the dispensation of justice in our legal system, and what can be done to stop it.

One of the barriers to action in the past has been an inability to prove that campaign donations influence state judicial decision-making. In this book, Kang and Shepherd answer that challenge for the first time, with a rigorous empirical study of campaign finance and judicial decision-making data. Pairing this with interviews of past and present judges, they create a compelling and persuasive account of people like Marsha Ternus, the first Iowa state supreme court justice to be voted out of office after her decision in a same-sex marriage case. The threat of such an outcome, and the desire to win reelection, results in judges demonstrably leaning towards the interests and preferences of their campaign donors across all cases.

Free to Judge is thus able to identify the pieces of our current system that invite bias, such as judicial reelection, and what reforms should focus on. This thoughtful and compellingly written book will be required reading for anybody who cares about creating a more just legal system.

  • Creators

  • Publisher

  • Release date

  • Formats

  • Languages

  • Reviews

    • Publisher's Weekly

      Starred review from June 26, 2023
      In this significant study, law professors Kang (coeditor of Race, Reform, and Regulation of the Electoral Process) and Shepherd (The Economics of Industrial Organization) present “the best empirical evidence to date” that judges decide cases in favor of their campaign donors. Drawing on a dataset 10 years in the making, they demonstrate that state judges who face reelection are more likely to rule in favor of their donors than lame-duck state judges who have reached the end of their term limits. The authors also provide historical insight into why judicial elections exist. In the mid-19th century, many states switched from appointments to elections to “protect judges from the influence of legislatures and governors”—a not-insignificant concern, as the authors go on to demonstrate that judges seeking reappointment are more likely to decide cases in the government’s favor. Kang and Shepherd conclude that any “judicial retention” mechanism that forces judges to be concerned about holding onto their job, whether reelection or reappointment, creates bias in their rulings, and recommend having judges serve single long terms as the best way to reduce favoritism. Ingeniously blending data science and legal analysis, this is an innovative and accessible program for justice system reform.

Formats

  • Kindle Book
  • OverDrive Read
  • EPUB ebook

Languages

  • English

Loading