New research investigates how retention systems affect judges' adherence to precedent.

Data & Methods

* Analyzed nearly 5,000 votes from over 400 state court of last resort judges across all US states.

* Compared outcomes based on three main retention methods: partisan elections, nonpartisan elections, and institutional appointments (like judicial commissions or state legislatures).

Key Findings

* Judges retained via election are significantly more likely to join majorities that overturn precedent.

* Most of this effect occurs in high-profile cases receiving media attention.

* Elections do not appear to moderate the judges' behavior approaching their term's end.

* Nonpartisan elections show no difference from institutional appointment methods.

Why It Matters

This study provides crucial insights into how election mechanics influence judicial decision-making regarding landmark legal principles.