Money in Judicial Elections
Why judicial elections are uniquely vulnerable to the influence of money and how campaign spending is reshaping American courts.
America's Unusual System
The United States is virtually alone among developed democracies in electing judges. Thirty-eight states hold some form of judicial elections, from partisan races that look like any other campaign to retention elections where voters decide whether to keep an appointed judge. No other major democracy asks voters to choose their judges, and for good reason: judicial independence, the principle that judges decide cases based on law rather than popular pressure, is fundamental to the rule of law.
For most of American history, judicial elections were sleepy affairs with low spending and low turnout. That changed dramatically after 2000. Total spending on state supreme court elections increased from $83 million in 2000 to over $500 million in 2022. The reason: as courts became the venue for deciding hot-button issues like abortion, gun rights, and gerrymandering, interest groups realized that electing sympathetic judges was more efficient than lobbying legislatures.