Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-kw2vx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-29T05:48:50.243Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Two Opposing Effects of Judicial Elections on Legitimacy Perceptions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2021

Benjamin Woodson
Benjamin Woodson*
Affiliation:
University of Missouri–Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, USA
*
Benjamin Woodson, Political Science, University of Missouri–Kansas City, 213 Haag Hall, 5100 Rockhill Road, Kansas City, MO 64110, USA. Email: woodsonb@umkc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Judicial elections have two opposing effects on legitimacy perceptions for state supreme courts. Elections not only provide a boost to legitimacy through the chance to hold officials accountable but also involve campaign activity that decreases legitimacy perceptions. This article examines these two opposing effects using a nationally representative survey that includes items assessing diffuse support for state supreme courts. It uses multiple indicators to differentiate between states with highly active election systems involving large amounts of campaign activity and states with less active elections systems that involve little campaign activity. The results from the survey show that the legitimacy of elected courts is higher than appointed courts but only in states with little election activity. In states with high amounts of election activity, the legitimacy of elected courts is lower than appointed courts.

Keywords

public opinionjudicial electionsjudicial politicsjudicial selectionelectoral systems
Type
Research Article
Information
State Politics & Policy Quarterly , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , March 2017 , pp. 24 - 46
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abramowitz, Alan I. 1991. “Incumbency, Campaign Spending, and the Decline of Competition in U.S. House Elections.” Journal of Politics 53 (February): 34–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Brandon L., and Johnston, Christopher D.. 2013. “On the Ideological Foundations of Supreme Court Legitimacy in the American Public.” American Journal of Political Science 57 (1): 184–99..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benesh, Sarah. 2006. “Understanding Public Confidence in American Courts.” The Journal of Politics 68 (August): 697–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonneau, Chris W. 2006. “Vacancies on the Bench: Open-Seat Elections for State Supreme Courts.” Justice System Journal 27 (2): 143–59..Google Scholar
Bonneau, Chris W., and Hall, Melinda Gann. 2009. In Defense of Judicial Elections. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cann, Damon, and Yates, Jeff. 2008. “Homegrown Institutional Legitimacy: Assessing Citizens' Diffuse Support for State Courts.” American Politics Research 36:297–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Easton, David. 1965. A Systems Analysis of Political Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Esaiasson, Peter. 2011. “Electoral Losers Revisited: How Citizens React to a Defeat at the Ballot Box.” Electoral Studies 30:102–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geyh, Charles G. 2003. “Why Judicial Elections Stink.” Ohio State Law Journal 64:43–79.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L. 2007. “The Legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court in a Polarized Polity.” Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 4 (3): 507–38..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. 2008a. “Campaigning for the Bench: The Corrosive Effects of Campaign Speech?” Law & Society Review 42 (4): 899–927..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. 2008b. “Challenges to the Impartiality of State Supreme Courts: Legitimacy Theory and ‘New Style’ Judicial Campaigns.” American Political Science Review 102:59–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. 2009. “‘New-Style’ Judicial Campaigns and the Legitimacy of State High Courts.” The Journal of Politics 71:1285–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. 2011. “A Note of Caution and the Meaning of ‘The Supreme Court Can Usually Be Trusted . . .‘” Law & Courts: Newsletter of the Law & Courts Section of the American Political Science Association 21 (3): 10–16..Google Scholar
Gibson, James L. 2012. Electing Judges: The Surprising Effects of Campaigning on Judicial Legitimacy. Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., and Caldeira, Gregory A.. 2009a. Citizens, Courts and Confirmations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., and Caldeira, Gregory A.. 2009b. “Knowing the Supreme Court? A Reconsideration of Public Ignorance of the High Court.” The Journal of Politics 71 (2): 429–41..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., Caldeira, Gregory A., and Spence, Lester Kenyatta. 2003. “Measuring Attitudes toward the United States Supreme Court.” American Journal of Political Science 47 (April): 354–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., Gottfried, Jeffrey, Carpini, Michale Delli, and Jamieson, Kathleen Hall. 2011. “The Effects of Judicial Campaign Activity on the Legitimacy of Courts: A Survey-Based Experiment.” Political Research Quarterly 64:545–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., Lodge, Milton, and Woodson, Benjamin. 2014. “Losing, but Accepting: Legitimacy, Positivity Theory, and the Symbols of Judicial Authority.” Law & Society Review 48 (4): 837–66..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., and Nelson, Michael J.. 2015. “Is the Supreme Court's Legitimacy Grounded in Performance Satisfaction and Ideology.” American Journal of Political Science 59 (1): 162–74..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Melinda Gann, and Bonneau, Chris W.. 2006. “Does Quality Matter? Challengers in State Supreme Court Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 50 (1): 20–33..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrnson, Paul S. 2001.Playing Hardall: Campaigning for the U.S. Congress. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Hibbing, John R., and Theiss-Morse, Elizabeth. 1995. Congress as Public Enemy: Public Attitudes toward American Political Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hojnacki, Marie, and Baum, Lawrence. 1992. “‘New Style’ Judicial Campaigns and the Voters: Economic Issues and Union Members in Ohio.” The Western Political Quarterly 45 (4): 921–48..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, and Hardy, Bruce. 2008. “Will Ignorance & Partisan Elections of Judges Undermine Public Trust in the Judiciary?” Daedalus 137:11–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lublin, David Ian. 1994. “Quality, Not Quantity: Strategic Politicians in U.S. Senate Elections, 1952-1990.” Journal of Politics 56 (February): 228–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schotland, Roy A. 2001. “Financing Judicial Elections, 2000: Change and Challenge.” Law Review of MSU-DCL 3:849–99.Google Scholar
Singh, Shane, Karakoc, Ekrem, and Blais, Andre. 2012. “Differentiating Winners: How Election Affect Satisfaction with Democracy.” Electoral Studies 31:201–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Dunk, Emily. 1997. “Challenger Quality in State Legislative Elections.” Political Research Quarterly 50 (December): 793–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenzel, James, Bowler, Shaun, and Lanoue, David. 2003. “The Sources of Public Confidence in State Courts: Experience and Institutions.” American Politics Research 31:191–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar