Campaign Spending and the Courts

Once quiet, low-budget affairs, state Supreme Court elections are now marked by runaway spending by special interest groups, which see judicial elections as an inexpensive investment to bend courts to their agendas.   

This change has caused deep concern among leading jurists, and among the general public, that campaign spending for judicial candidates could translate to favorable treatment in the courtroom. There is a growing perception that justice is “for sale.”

Spending Data

In just seven years, 2000-2007, the amount raised by state Supreme Court candidates more than doubled the total raised in the entire 1990s: ($167.8 million, compared with $87.7 million, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics.)

Third-party groups, often bankrolled by special interests, play a key and growing role in state judicial elections. In 2008, four of the five most expensive TV ad campaigns were paid for by third-party groups, only one by an actual candidate, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. Because of weak campaign disclosure laws, the true financial backers often remain hidden.

Poll Data: What the public, judges and business leaders think about judicial campaign spending

Notable Quotes: What leading legal authorities say about the danger to American courts

Home | History | Spending | Debate | Reforms | Poll | Resources | Grisham | Commentaries | JAS Brief | Quotes