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.
| Stare Decisis and the Electoral Connection: Do Retention Systems Affect Judges' Deference to Precedent? was authored by Michael K. Miller and Michelle Tuma. It was published by Sage in SPPQ in 2020. |
