Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
American Politics Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (11)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bonneau, C. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Electoral Verdicts

Incumbent Defeats in State Supreme Court Elections

Chris W. Bonneau

University of Pittsburgh

The election of judges has been an enduring, though controversial, institution. Although there have been many popular accounts of howthese elections are decided by factors irrelevant to a fair and impartial judiciary, recent scholarship has shown that electoral competition in races for the state high court bench can be understood in systematic ways. Yet, although we know the factors that can make races more or less competitive, we lack understanding of the factors that contribute to the electoral defeat of sitting justices. In this article, I examine the determinants of electoral defeat for all incumbent state supreme court justices who ran for reelection between 1990 and 2000. Contrary to the arguments of those who claim that judicial elections are decided in a random, nonsystematic manner, I find that the probability of an incumbent’s being defeated is based on characteristics of the candidates, the state and electoral context, and institutional arrangements.

Key Words: state supreme courts • judicial politics • judicial elections • campaign spending • incumbency advantage • judges

American Politics Research, Vol. 33, No. 6, 818-841 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/1532673X04273414
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Political Research QuarterlyHome page
M. J. Streb and B. Frederick
Conditions for Competition in Low-Information Judicial Elections: The Case of Intermediate Appellate Court Elections
Political Research Quarterly, September 1, 2009; 62(3): 523 - 537.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 American Politics ResearchHome page
M. J. Streb, B. Frederick, and C. LaFrance
Voter Rolloff in a Low-Information Context: Evidence From Intermediate Appellate Court Elections
American Politics Research, July 1, 2009; 37(4): 644 - 669.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Political Research QuarterlyHome page
C. W. Bonneau
The Effects of Campaign Spending in State Supreme Court Elections
Political Research Quarterly, September 1, 2007; 60(3): 489 - 499.
[Abstract] [PDF]