NEWS CLIPS

Report: Mo. lower court campaigns targeted by special interests

A new report from a Washington, D.C., think tank says Missouri might be at the forefront of the next battle over the courts -- the targeting of lower court judicial elections by special interest groups.

"The New Politics of Judicial Elections 2006" -- issued by the Justice at Stake Campaign and its partners, the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law and the National Institute for Money in State Politics -- notes that Chicago-based Americans for Limited Government put $175,000 into a group called Citizens for Judicial Reform in a successful campaign to evict Missouri’s Cole County Circuit Judge Tom Brown.

In Illinois, interest groups put money into trial and appeals court campaigns, two years after fueling a $9.3 million race for that state’s highest court, according to a release.

"The problems infecting campaigns for many of this nation’s highest courts appear ready to spread to lower courts, and the Missouri example is particularly troubling," said Bert Brandenburg, executive director of the Justice at Stake Campaign. "If Missouri starts going the way of Illinois, its judicial elections will soon be overrun."

"Justice at Stake’s report shows how in too many states, judicial elections are becoming political prizefights where partisans and special interests seek to install judges who will answer to them instead of the law and the constitution," said former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. "I hope that every state that elects judges in partisan elections will consider reforms."

The report also identifies Missouri as a battleground state in ongoing efforts by partisans and interest groups to fight systems that use merit selection with retention elections, such as Missouri’s Nonpartisan Court Plan. Such systems mitigate the worst side effects of contestable elections, while leaving voters with a final say on who sits on the bench, according to the report.

The New Politics report focuses largely on the 11 states that had contested Supreme Court campaigns in 2006. Among the report’s national findings:

TV ads in high court campaigns ran in 10 of 11 states with contested elections, compared with four of 18 states in 2000. Average television spending per state was $1.6 million, a new record.
Median fundraising by candidates for state high courts hit a record high of $243,910. Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Oregon and Washington set aggregate candidate fundraising records for high court campaigns.
State Supreme Court elections attracted record sums from business interests, a reflection of the importance of state courts in setting corporate damage payments, according to the report. The report said that campaign finance analysis showed that business gave $2 for every $1 donated by lawyers directly to candidates.
Judicial candidates overwhelmingly rejecting questionnaires from special interest groups: Only 17 percent of candidates for seats on Florida’s trial courts responded to a question asking their position on same-sex marriage.
Report sponsor Justice at Stake cited a nationwide survey of business leaders by Zogby International that showed 79 percent believe that campaign contributions made to judges have at least some influence on courtroom decisions, and 90 percent are concerned that campaign contributions and political pressure will make judges accountable to politicians and special interest groups instead of to the law and the Constitution.

Washington, D.C.-based Justice at Stake is a nationwide, nonpartisan partnership of more than 30 judicial, legal and citizen organizations that advocates for fair and impartial courts.

Full Article