Law Commons^™

Why The Judicial Electons Debate Matters Less Than You Think: Retention As The Cornerstone Of Independence And Accountability, Layne S. Keele

Layne S. Keele

The judicial elections debate has once again claimed the national spotlight with the Supreme Court’s 2009 decision in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. and with the 2010 electoral defeat of three Iowa Supreme Court judges who joined an opinion striking down Iowa’s law refusing to recognize same-sex marriage. Judicial election opponents generally criticize elections as interfering with judicial independence, while election advocates laud them as a means to increase judicial accountability. What can be overlooked in these debates, however, is that judicial elections are not the source of the threat to judicial independence—instead, that threat arises from re-elections, or …