Campaign Activity

This empirical study of judicial campaign expenditures in nonpartisanCaliforniatrial California trial court elections from 1976 to 1982 concludes that when viewed from the systemic level, judicial campaign costs are neither extraordinarily high nor rapidly increasing, and that as compared to expenditures for other political campagins, the costs are insignificant.

This article analyzes how campaign expenditures affect incumbents in state supreme court elections and concludes that electoral competition in such elections is influenced by the characteristics of the candidates, the state and electoral context, and institutional arrangements.

This article examines the determinants of campaign contributions to candidates running for the state supreme court from 1990–2000 and finds that, while candidates with a greater likelihood of success are better able to raise money, the electoral context of the state and the court and the institutional arrangements of the election and the court are also key factors in candidates’ ability to raise money.

This empirical study analyzes data from 281 state supreme court races in 21 states from 1990–2000 to address why campaign spending varies so greatly among state supreme court elections and finds that spending in such elections is influenced by the characteristics of the race, institutional arrangements, and  the electoral and state supreme court context.

This article analyzes campaign spending trends in all contested state elections from 1990–2000.

This empirical study of campaigning in judicial retention elections in Illinois finds that although half of the judges in those elections engaged in some campaigning, campaigning activity had no discernible effect on election outcome.

This empirical study examines statewide partisan judicial elections in North Carolina from 1988 to 1994 and concludes that these elections were unresponsive to expenditures and incumbency because candidates cannot raise enough money to affect the vote.

This article examines whether the “New Style” of judicial elections, whereby candidates spend ever increasing amounts of money to effectively campaign, has spread to lower court elections.