Analyzing the Link between Dollars and Decisions: A Multi-State Study of Campaign Contributions and Judicial Decision Making
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-779X.2016.35.1.65-91Abstract
This article examines the causal connection between attorney contributions and judicial decisions in elective states. The results show that contributions are a significant predictor of appellant success in state supreme courts when judges receive contributions from the attorneys for the appellant. However, this relationship is contingent on the competitiveness of the judicial seat. The analysis shows that judges who received a low percentage of the vote in the previous election are more likely to vote with contributors than judges who received a high percentage. This evidence bolsters the argument that contributions directly affect decision making when judges feel electoral pressure. The results also support the proposition that elected judges are more likely to vote with donors in states with nonpartisan ballots. While the contribution amounts are higher in partisan states, the judges in the nonpartisan sample are more closely aligned with their contributors when it comes to decision making.
References
Andersen, Seth. 2004. "Examining the Decline in Support for Merit Selection in the States." Albany Law Review 67 (Spring): 793-802.
Arbour, Brian K., and Mark J. McKenzie. 2010. "Has the 'New Style' of Judicial Campaigning Reached Lower Court Elections?" Judicature 93 (January-February): 150-160.
Bond, Jon R., Cary Covington, and Richard Fleisher. 1985. "Explaining Challenger Quality in Congressional Elections." The Journal of Politics 47(2): 510-529. https://doi.org/10.2307/2130894
Bonneau, Chris W. 2005. "What Price Justice(s)? Understanding Campaign Spending in State Supreme Court Elections." State Politics and Policy Quarterly 5 (Spring): 107-125. https://doi.org/10.1177/153244000500500201
Bonneau, Chris W. 2012. "A Survey of Empirical Evidence Concerning Judicial Elections." Federalist Society White Paper (March).
Bonneau, Chris W., and Damon Cann. 2011. "Campaign Spending, Diminishing Marginal Returns, and Campaign Finance Restrictions in State Supreme Court Elections." Journal of Politics 73 (4): 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381611000934
Bonneau, Chris W. and Melinda G. Hall. 2009. In Defense of Judicial Elections. New York: Routledge.
Brace, Paul, and Brent D. Boyea. 2008. "State Public Opinion, the Death Penalty, and the Practice of Electing Judges." American Journal of Political Science 52 (April): 360-372. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00317.x
Brace, Paul R. and Melinda G. Hall. 1997. "The Interplay of Preferences, Case Facts, Context, and Rules in the Politics of Judicial Choice." Journal of Politics 59 (November): 1206-1231. https://doi.org/10.2307/2998598
Caldarone, Richard P., Brandice Canes-Wrone, and Tom S. Clark. 2009. "Partisan Labels and Democratic Accountability: An Analysis of State Supreme Court Abortion Decisions." Journal of Politics 71 (April): 560-573. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002238160909046X
Cann, Damon M. 2002. "Campaign Contributions and Judicial Behavior." American Review of Politics 23 (Fall): 261-274. https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2002.23.0.261-274
Cann, Damon. 2007. "Justice for Sale? Campaign Contributions and Judicial Decisionmaking." State Politics and Policy Quarterly 7 (Fall): 281-297. https://doi.org/10.1177/153244000700700303
Cann, Damon M., Chris W. Bonneau, and Brent D. Boyea. 2012. "Campaign Contributions and Judicial Decisions in Partisan and Nonpartisan Elections." In New Directions in Judicial Politics, edited by Kevin T. McGuire. New York: Routledge.
Cann, Damon M. and Teena Wilhelm. 2011. "Case Visibility and the Electoral Connection in State Supreme Courts." American Politics Research 39 (May): 557-581. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X10385778
Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. 2009. 556 U.S. 868.
Fitzpatrick, Brian T. 2009. "The Politics of Merit Selection." Vanderbilt Law Review 74 (Summer): 675-709.
Frederick, Brian and Matthew J. Streb. 2011. "The Cost of Going for the Gavel: Individual Candidate Spending in Intermediate Appellate Court Elections." Justice System Journal 32 (1): 25-43.
Geyh, Charles G. 2003. "Why Judicial Elections Stink." Ohio State Law Journal 64 (1): 43-79.
Gordon, Sanford C. and Gregory A. Huber. 2007. "The Effect of Electoral Competitiveness on Incumbent Behavior." Quarterly Journal of Political Science 2 (May): 107-138. https://doi.org/10.1561/100.00006035
Hall, Melinda G. 1987. "Constituency Influence in State Supreme Courts: Conceptual Notes and a Case Study." Journal of Politics 49: 1117-1124. https://doi.org/10.2307/2130788
Hall, Melinda G. 1992. "Electoral Politics and Strategic Voting in State Supreme Courts." Journal of Politics 54 (May): 427-446. https://doi.org/10.2307/2132033
Hall, Melinda G. 1995. "Justices as Representatives: Elections and Judicial Politics in the American States." American Politics Quarterly 23 (October): 485-503. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X9502300407
Hall, Melinda G., and Chris W. Bonneau. 2006. ''Does Quality Matter? Challengers in State Supreme Court Elections.'' American Journal of Political Science 50: 20–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00167.x
Hettinger, Virginia A., Stefanie A. Lindquist, and Wendy L. Martinek. 2006. Judging on a Collegial Court: Influences on Federal Appellate Decision Making. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press.
Karaca-Mandic, Pinar, Edward C. Norton, and Bryan Dowd. 2012. "Interaction Terms in Nonlinear Models." HSR: Health Services Research 47(1): 255-274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01314.x
Langer, Laura. 2002. Judicial Review in State Supreme Courts: A Comparative Study. Albany: SUNY Press.
McCall, Madhavi. 2003. "The Politics of Judicial Elections: The Influence of Campaign Contributions on the Voting Patterns of Texas Supreme Court Justices, 1994-1997." Politics & Policy 31 (June): 314-343. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2003.tb00151.x
Norton, Edward D., Hua Wang, and Chunrong Ai. 2004. "Computing Interaction Effects and Standard Errors in Logit and Probit Models." The Stata Journal 4(2): 154-167.
Peters, C. Scott. 2007. "Canons, Cost, and Competition in State Supreme Court Elections." Judicature 91:27–35.
Rock, Emily, and Lawrence Baum. 2010. "The Impact of High-Visibility Contests for U.S. State Court Judgeships: Partisan Voting in Nonpartisan Elections." State Politics and Policy Quarterly 10 (Winter): 368-396. https://doi.org/10.1177/153244001001000405
Shepherd, Joanna M. 2009. "Money, Politics, and Impartial Justice." Duke Law Journal 58 (January): 623-685.
Skaggs, Adam, Maria da Silva, Linda Casey, and Charles Hall. 2011. The New Politics of Judicial Elections 2009-10. Washington, DC: Justice at Stake Campaign.
Songer, Donald R., and Ashlyn Kuersten. 1995. "The Success of Amici in State Supreme Courts." Political Research Quarterly 48(1): 31-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591299504800102 https://doi.org/10.2307/449118
Waltenburg, Eric N., and Charles S. Lopeman. 2000. "Tort Decisions and Campaign Dollars." Southeastern Political Review 28: 241-263. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2000.tb00575.x
Ware, Stephen J. 1999. "Money, Politics, and Judicial Decisions: A Case Study of Arbitration Law in Alabama." Journal of Law and Politics 25: 645-686.
Wright, Gerald C., and Brian F. Schaffner. 2002. "The Influence of Party: Evidence from the State Legislatures." American Political Science Review 96(2): 367-379. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055402000229
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:
The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;
Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
The Author represents and warrants that:
the Work is the Author’s original work;
the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
the Work has not previously been published;
the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
