Elections and Decision Making on State High Courts: Examining Legitimacy and Judicial Review

Abstract

There has long been a debate over how we should select and retain justices on state supreme courts. Many argue that electing the members of these courts challenges the impartiality of the judicial branch. Others highlight that these elected institutions are to be accountable to the public, a condition that is being met. To inform this debate, scholars have long sought to determine if there are significant differences in the composition of, or decision making on these courts. This article continues in that tradition, examining the use of the courts’ most important power, judicial review, on elected and appointed courts. I find very few differences in the use of judicial review among courts with different methods of selection and retention.