Regulating Judicial Elections: Assessing State Codes of Judicial Conduct (Law, Courts and Politics)

Supreme Court cases.Regulating Judicial Elections provides the first accounting of the efficacy and consequences of such rules. State judicial elections are governed by a unique set of rules that enforce longstanding norms of judicial independence by limiting how judicial candidates campaign. Peters finds that while some parts of state codes of conduct achieve their desired goals, others may backfire and increase the politicization of judicial elections. These empirical findings will inform ongoing normative debates about judicial elections.. In doing so, he is able to examine the costs and benefits

. Scott Peters is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Northern Iowa. C

Through impressive data collection and persuasive analysis, this book demonstrates that the rules designed to regulate how judges campaign do have some effects, both on the nature of the campaigns and electoral outcomes. 'Regulating Judicial Elections makes outstanding contributions to the scientific literature and the intense debate about electing judges in at least two ways: 1) by providing expertly drawn empirical evidence about the sometimes surprising effects of codes of judicial conduct on fundamental features of state supreme court elections, and 2) by advancing a more sophisticated and nuanced understanding of the traditional normative frames of judicial independence and accountability, including the potential for accountability to promote the rule of law. This important book is likely to be influential among both scholars and po