Giving Lip Service to Judicial Independence
When it comes to big spending in judicial elections, Alabama is pretty much the biggest. It's at or near the top of the list in ...
When it comes to big spending in judicial elections, Alabama is pretty much the biggest. It's at or near the top of the list in both overall spending and in TV advertising for state judicial races.
In 1995, the state passed a couple laws to help rein in the effects of that spending. Under the laws, if a judge has received campaign contributions from a party in a case (the limits are $2,000 for circuit judges and $4,000 for appellate judges), then the opposing party can force the judge to recuse himself from the case.
But now, some Alabama residents are accusing judges of ignoring the laws. A lawsuit has been filed against the state for failing to enforce the laws.
Earlier this year, I wrote an article in Governing about the increasing politicization of judicial races, and the skyrocketing costs of them. Critics of these trends say the increased spending is leading to a judiciary dependent on -- and beholden to -- special interests.
Laws like the ones in Alabama are one way to address the influence of money. But not if they're not enforced.
Join the Discussion
After you comment, click Post. You can enter an anonymous Display Name or connect to a social profile.
Unrest Continues in Ferguson26 minutes ago
To Save Money, Cal State Considers Not Accepting Freshmen at All29 minutes ago
Judges Overturn Gay Marriage Bans in Mississippi and Arkansas39 minutes ago
How the GOP's Rust Belt Governors Might Fix its 1% Problem49 minutes ago
New San Francisco Rule Prevents Employers from Changing Worker Schedules54 minutes ago
Push for School Diversity Moves to Minnesota Suburbs1 hour ago