•  
  •  
 

Brigham Young University Prelaw Review

Abstract

Contemporary judicial election processes in many states allow for judicial campaign donors to appear, unethically, in court before the justice to whom they contributed funds. This paper studies various cases involving apparent quid pro quo between State Supreme Court justices and their constituents in court, the ethics of their rulings, and examines a judge’s role in government as a representative of the law. It reaches the conclusion that judicial elections facilitate unethical practices in the courtroom, and an alternate method of judicial appointment, still allowing public oversight, is presented.

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS