Internet Explorer 11 is not supported

For optimal browsing, we recommend Chrome, Firefox or Safari browsers.
GOV_billy-corriher

Billy Corriher

Contributor

Billy Corriher is a writer whose work focuses on judges, voting rights and the courts in North Carolina. His work can be found at FacingSouth.org and TheSupremeCourts.org. He has also written about these issues for ThinkProgress, The Hill, USA Today, The Los Angeles Times, Newsweek and the Raleigh News & Observer. From 2012 to 2017, he worked on issues around judges and judicial nominations at the Center for American Progress, a progressive think tank in Washington, D.C. He is the author of “Usurpers: How Voters Stopped the GOP Takeover of North Carolina’s Courts,” published in May 2021.

Corriher earned his bachelor's degree in political science with a minor in journalism from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and his law degree from Georgia State University in Atlanta. Before attending law school, he was a reporter for the Clayton News-Daily in Georgia.

Judges shouldn’t hear cases involving their campaign donors. Though some lawmakers are addressing the issue, only a few states have ethics rules that require judges to avoid hearing such cases.
Political partisanship is playing out across the country as lawmakers move to change how their states’ supreme courts are elected.
Across the country, legislators are trying to gain more control over their states' courts. Many of the efforts are from Republicans aiming to diminish the role of judicial nominating commissions.
Millions of dollars were spent on races for the Michigan, Ohio and Illinois high courts. The elections could impact a host of cases.
In recent years, Republican-led legislatures have been adding state supreme court seats and working to change nominating rules, aiming to bolster conservative majorities.