Electing - rather than appointing - state court judges has drawbacks, study finds

Aug 08, 2012 By Linda B. Glaser

In traditional economic thought, competition is always good, and just as it's good for the economy, competitive elections should also make things better. But elections of public officials such as judges may have serious drawbacks. In the case of state court judges, for example, elected judges are far more variable in their sentencing than appointed judges, according to a new study.

The study, forthcoming in the , looks at how two kinds of selection systems for state court judges -- appointment by the head of the executive branch and election by -- influence their criminal sentencing decisions.

"People see competition as good, but I look at the way incentives are determined so I can see when it is effective in a particular situation," explains political economist Claire Lim, assistant professor of economics and the Sheng-Larkin Sesquicentennial Faculty Fellow.

In analyzing data on judges for the state of Kansas, one of the few states that has within-state variation in how judges are chosen, Lim found that "the sentencing harshness of elected judges is strongly related to the of the voters in their districts, while that of appointed judges is not."

Lim points out that governors have an advantage when appointing judges because they are likely to have more accurate information about the and sentencing approaches of a candidate than is generally available to voters during a campaign. "How many voters are smart enough to interpret legal decisions and judge the judges?" she asks.

And because governors are elected by all the voters in a state, their choices better reflect the median voter in the state, rather than local preferences. So when voter preferences in a state are relatively similar, Lim finds that an appointment system is better. "But when voter preferences in a district vary substantially, and the goal is for a to represent the ideology of their constituency, an election system may be better," she concludes in her paper.

However, re-election concerns may have the drawback of reducing the quality of judges in an electoral system by discouraging qualified candidates who are doing well in the private sector from holding office.

Lim points out that public critique during a campaign is a disincentive to lawyers to seek office; this can result in the best candidate for a judgeship declining to compete for the position. Such lawyers would be likely to serve in an appointed system, however.

"We should focus more on designing a good system that reflects these lessons from the data," she says.

Explore further: Oceans apart: Study reveals insights into the evolution of languages

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Best judicial candidates need not apply -- and they don't

Nov 16, 2010

(PhysOrg.com) -- Gubernatorial appointment of judges to New York's highest court -- a process many legal scholars and officials believe is better than popular election -- has choked off access for most of the best candidates ...

Judges on trial: How to promote judicial accountability

Jan 19, 2010

Public employees have long been subject to performance reviews that evaluate how well they are performing their jobs. But can judges, public employees who literally hold the power of life and death in their hands, be assessed ...

Fla. judges, lawyers must 'unfriend' on Facebook

Dec 12, 2009

(AP) -- Florida's judges and lawyers should no longer "friend" each other on Facebook, the popular social networking site, according to a ruling from the state's Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee.

Bias found in state supreme courts, according to UGA study

May 31, 2012

The assignment to write a court's majority opinion is one of the major tools for shaping judicial and, consequently, public policy. Researchers at the University of Georgia, along with the University of North Carolina at ...

Recommended for you

Modern population boom traced to pre-industrial roots

58 minutes ago

The foundation of the human population explosion, commonly attributed to a sudden surge in industrialization and public health during the 18th and 19th centuries, was actually laid as far back as 2,000 years ...

Researcher looks at the future of higher education

1 hour ago

Most forecasts about the future of higher education have focused on how the institutions themselves will be affected – including the possibility of less demand for classes on campus and fewer tenured faculty members as ...

Now we know why it's so hard to deceive children

2 hours ago

Daily interactions require bargaining, be it for food, money or even making plans. These situations inevitably lead to a conflict of interest as both parties seek to maximise their gains. To deal with them, ...

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

jonnyboy
Aug 08, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Satene
1 / 5 (1) Aug 09, 2012
I explained many times, that election process has drawback in its principal asymmetry: you can only vote people and add your voice to candidate, but you cannot remove your voice, not to say about downvoting. This gradually introduces bias into results of election.