Scholarly research finds that partisan, hard-fought, expensive, and churlish state supreme court campaigns increase voter participation and their support for challenger candidates. These insights, however, are drawn nearly exclusively from competitive state supreme court elections. Little is known about voter behavior in uncompetitive retention elections. Traditionally, these races are not salient to the public given that incumbents raise and spend little-to-no money, and campaigns, parties, and political action committees air few (if any) advertisements. Since 2010, however, such behavior has become more commonplace. I assess voter participation and incumbent performance in 178 state supreme court retention elections from 2002 to 2014. I find that expensive, churlish retention elections are likely to increase voter turnout and to hurt incumbents’ efforts to win retention.
American Bar Association. 2003. Justice in Jeopardy: Report of the American Bar Association Commission on the 21st Century Judiciary. Chicago: American Bar Association.
2.
AnasolabehereStephanIyengarShanto. 1995. Going Negative: How Political Advertisements Shrink and Polarize the Electorate. New York: Free Press.
AspinLarry T.2017. “Judicial Retention Elections.” In Judicial Elections in the 21st Century, eds. BonneauChris W.HallMelinda Gann. New York: Routledge, 93–138.
5.
AspinLarry T.HallWilliam K.BaxJeanMontoya.Celeste2000. “Thirty Years of Judicial Retention Elections: An Update.” The Social Science Journal37:1–17.
6.
BonneauChris W.2005. “Electoral Verdicts: Incumbent Defeats in State Supreme Court Elections.” American Politics Research33:818–41.
7.
BonneauChris W.2007. “The Effects of Campaign Spending in State Supreme Court Elections.” Political Research Quarterly60:489–99.
8.
BonneauChris W.CannDamon M.2011. “Campaign Spending, Diminishing Marginal Returns, and Campaign Finance Restrictions in Judicial Elections.” The Journal of Politics73:1267–80.
9.
BonneauChris W.HallMelinda Gann. 2009. In Defense of Judicial Elections. New York: Routledge.
10.
BracePaulHallMelinda Gann. 2001. “‘Haves’ versus ‘Have Nots’ in State Supreme Courts: Allocating Docket Space and Wins in Power Asymmetric Cases.” Law & Society Review35:393–417.
11.
CaldaroneRichard P.BrandiceCanes-WroneClarkTom S.2009. “Partisan Labels and Democratic Accountability: An Analysis of State Supreme Court Abortion Decisions.” The Journal of Politics71:560–73.
12.
Canes-WroneBrandiceClarkTom S.KellyJason P.2014. “Judicial Selection and Death Penalty Decisions.” American Political Science Review108:23–39.
13.
CannDamon M.WilhelmTeena. 2011. “Case Visibility and the Electoral Connection in State Supreme Courts.” American Politics Research39:557–81.
GeerJohn G.2006. In Defense of Negativity: Attack Ads in Presidential Campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
19.
GelmanAndrewHillJennifer. 2007. Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel Hierarchical Models. New York: Cambridge University Press.
20.
GeyhCharles Gardner. 2003. “Why Judicial Elections Stink.” Ohio State Law Journal64:43–79.
21.
GillRebecca D.2017. “Do Judicial Performance Evaluations Influence Retention Election Results?” In Judicial Elections in the 21st Century, eds. BonneauChris W.HallMelinda Gann. New York: Routledge, 175–92.
22.
GoelzhauserGreg. 2016. Choosing State Supreme Court Justices: Merit Selection and the Consequences of Institutional Reform. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
GoldbergDeborah. 2007. “Interest Group Participation in Judicial Elections.” In Running for Judge: The Rising Political, Financial, and Legal Stakes of Judicial Elections, ed. StrebMatthew J.New York: New York University Press, 73–95.
25.
HallKermit L.1983. “The Judiciary on Trial: State Constitutional Reform and the Rise of an Elected Judiciary, 1846–1860.” Historian45:337–54.
26.
HallMelinda Gann. 1987. “Constituent Influence in State Supreme Courts: Conceptual Notes and a Case Study.” The Journal of Politics49:1117–24.
27.
HallMelinda Gann. 2007. “Voting in State Supreme Court Elections: Competition and Context as Democratic Incentives.” The Journal of Politics69:1147–59.
28.
HallMelinda Gann. 2015. Attacking Judges: How Campaign Advertising Influences State Supreme Court Elections. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
29.
HallMelinda GannBonneauChris W.2006. “Does Quality Matter? Challengers in State Supreme Court Elections.” American Journal of Political Science50:20–33.
30.
HallMelinda GannBonneauChris W.2008. “Mobilizing Interest: The Effects of Money on Citizen Participation in State Supreme Court Elections.” American Journal of Political Science52:457–70.
31.
HallMelinda GannBonneauChris W.2013. “Attack Advertising, the White Decision, and Voter Participation in State Supreme Court Elections.” Political Research Quarterly66:115–26.
32.
HanssenF. Andrew. 2004. “Is There a Politically Optimal Level of Judicial Independence?” The American Economic Review94:712–29.
33.
HojnackiMarieBaumLawrence. 1992. “‘New-Style’ Judicial Campaigns and the Voters: Economic Issues and Union Members in Ohio.” Western Political Quarterly45:921–48.
34.
IyengarShanto. 2002. “The Effects of Media-Based Campaigns on Candidate and Voter Behavior: Implications for Judicial Elections.” Indiana Law Review35:691–99.
35.
JacksonRobert A.CarseyThomas M.2007. “US Senate Campaigns, Negative Advertising, and Voter Mobilization in the 1998 Midterm Election.” Electoral Studies26:180–95.
36.
JacobsonGary C.1978. “The Effects of Campaign Spending in Congressional Elections.” American Political Science Review72:469–91.
37.
KalesAlbert M.1914. “Methods of Selecting and Retiring Judges.” Journal of the American Judicature Society6:29–52.
KleinDavidBaumLawrence. 2001. “Ballot Information and Voting Decisions in Judicial Elections.” Political Research Quarterly54:709–28.
40.
KlumppTilmanMialonHugo M.WilliamsMichael A.2016. “The Business of American Democracy: Citizens United, Independent Spending, and Elections.” The Journal of Law & Economics59:1–43.
KritzerHerbert M.2015. Justices on the Ballot: Continuity and Change in State Supreme Court Elections. New York: Cambridge University Press.
43.
LernerRenée Lettow. 2007. “From Popular Control to Independence: Reform of the Elected Judiciary in Boss Tweed’s New York.” George Mason Law Review15:109–60.
44.
MayMelissa S.2012. “Judicial Retention Elections after 2010.” Indiana Law Review46:59–86.
PattersonThomas E.McClureRobert D.1976. The Unseeing Eye: The Myth of Television Power in National Politics. New York: Putnam.
47.
PettysTodd E.2010. “Letter from Iowa: Same-Sex Marriage and the Ouster of Three Justices.” University of Kansas Law Review59:715–45.
48.
PoundRoscoe. 1906. “The Causes of Popular Dissatisfaction with the Administration of Justice.” American Lawyer14:445–51.
49.
SchaffnerBrian F.DiascroJennifer Segal. 2007. “Judicial Elections in the News.” In Running for Judge: The Rising Political, Financial, and Legal Stakes of Judicial Elections, ed. StrebMatthew J.New York: New York University Press, 115–39.
50.
SchaffnerBrian F.StrebMatthew J.2002. “The Partisan Heuristic in Low-Information Elections.” Public Opinion Quarterly66:559–81.
51.
SchaffnerBrian F.StrebMatthew J.WrightGerald. 2001. “Teams without Uniforms: The Nonpartisan Ballot in State and Local Elections.” Political Research Quarterly54:7–30.
52.
SchotlandRoy A.1998. “Comment: Judicial Independence and Accountability.” Law and Contemporary Problems61:149–55.
53.
SquirePeverill. 2008. “Measuring the Professionalization of U.S. State Courts of Last Resort.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly8:223–38.
54.
StrebMatthew J.2007. “The Study of Judicial Elections.” In Running for Judge: The Rising Political, Financial, and Legal Stakes of Judicial Elections, ed. StrebMatthew J.New York: New York University Press, 1-14.
55.
SturmAlbert L.1982. “The Development of American State Constitutions.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism12:57–98.
WestDarrell M.2010. Air Wars: Television Advertising in Election Campaigns, 1952–2008. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
58.
WilliamsonVanessaSkocpolThedaCogginJohn. 2011. “The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism.” Perspectives on Politics9:25–43.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
