Book contents
- Judicial Selection in the States
- Judicial Selection in the States
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Preface
- Table of Cases
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Change as an Exercise in Partisan Politics
- 2 North Carolina
- 3 Arkansas
- 4 West Virginia
- 5 Tennessee
- Part II Change as Court Modernization or Good Government
- Part III Unsuccessful Change Efforts
- Index
2 - North Carolina
Partisanship in the Extreme
from Part I - Change as an Exercise in Partisan Politics
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 April 2020
- Judicial Selection in the States
- Judicial Selection in the States
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Preface
- Table of Cases
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Change as an Exercise in Partisan Politics
- 2 North Carolina
- 3 Arkansas
- 4 West Virginia
- 5 Tennessee
- Part II Change as Court Modernization or Good Government
- Part III Unsuccessful Change Efforts
- Index
Summary
North Carolina could be described as the archetype of political/policy motivation in states changing their judicial selection/retention systems. Although the first change from partisan to nonpartisan elections came in response to litigation, most of the changes to nonpartisan elections were made when the Democratic Party controlled the legislature, but Republican judicial candidates were having increasing success in partisan judicial elections. Once Republicans obtained political control in the state, the legislature sought to manipulate judicial selection/retention to advantage Republicans, albeit sometimes being hoisted on their own petard.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Judicial Selection in the StatesPolitics and the Struggle for Reform, pp. 33 - 57Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020