Investigating How Voters Weigh Issues and Partisanship in Judicial Elections

Judicial Independence and Retention Elections *

Judges face retention elections in over a third of U.S. state courts of last resort and numerous lower courts. According to conventional wisdom, these elections engender judicial independence and decrease democratic accountability. We argue that in the context of modern judicial campaigns, retention elections create pressure for judges to cater to public opinion on “hot-button” issues that are ...

Elections and Explanations: Judicial Elections and the Readability of Judicial Opinions

How do judicial elections affect the propensity of judges to write opinions that are understandable to the public? Drawing on a growing literature that analyzes the content of judicial opinions computationally, I examine the readability of all state supreme court search and seizure decisions from 2000-2010. I assess the hypothesis that, just as judicial elections increase judges’ propensities t...

Judicial Elections and Judicial Independence: The Voter's Perspective

The relationship between judicial elections and judicial independence is receiving considerable scrutiny today. This article examines the impact of elections on judicial independence from the perspective of voters, since it is voters’ choices that ultimately determine the electoral fates of incumbent judges. The research on voting in judicial elections helps in understanding the circumstances t...

Are Voters Rational? Evidence from Gubernatorial Elections

Standard agency theory suggests that rational voters will vote to re-elect politicians who deliver favorable outcomes. A second implication is that rational voters will not support a politician because of good outcomes unrelated to the politician’s actions. Specifically, rational voters should try to filter signal from noise, both in order to avoid electing incompetent, but lucky politicians, a...

The Effect of Partisan Information On Voters in Nonpartisan Elections