In "Electing Judges, " leading judicial politics scholar James
L. Gibson responds tothe growing chorus of critics who fear that
the politics of running for office undermine judicial independence
and even the rule of law. While many people have opinions on the
topic, few have supported them with actual empirical evidence.
Gibson rectifies this situation, offering the most systematic and
comprehensive study to date of the impact of campaigns on public
perceptions of fairness, impartiality, and the legitimacy of
elected state courts--and his findings are both counterintuitive
and controversial. Gibson finds that ordinary Americans do not
conclude from campaign promises that judges are incapable of making
impartial decisions. Instead, he shows, they understand the process
of deciding cases to be an exercise in policy making, rather than
of simply applying laws to individual cases--and consequently think
it's important for candidates to reveal where they stand on
important issues. Negative advertising also turns out to have a
limited effect on perceptions of judicial legitimacy, though the
same cannot be said for widely hated campaign contributions. Taking
both the good and bad into consideration, Gibson argues
persuasively that elections are ultimately beneficial in boosting
the institutional legitimacy of courts, despite the slight negative
effects of some campaign activities. "Electing Judges" will
initiate a lively debate inside both the halls of justice and the
academy.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!