Abstract
Even at their most salient, judicial retention elections do not increase turnout on Election Day. However, those who vote often participate in judicial retention races at higher levels than usual following salient judicial decisions. I use a series of difference-in-differences analyses to estimate the effect of the Iowa Supreme Court’s legalization of same-sex marriage on the subsequent retention races. I find that retention race participation was higher than we would have otherwise expected after the decision. Scholars often cite the infrequence with which justices are removed as evidence of justices’ relative independence from voters in retention elections, but the overwhelming retention of these justices does not mean they are independent from voters. Increases in the number of ballots cast in these races is perhaps more important than increases in negative votes when it comes to judicial independence, because each vote is an evaluation of the justices, whether positive or negative.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Law,General Social Sciences
Reference28 articles.
1. Framing the Debate: Understanding Iowa’s 2010 Judicial Retention Election Through a Content Analysis of Letters to the Editor;Buller;Iowa Law Review,2011
2. Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015).
3. Voting in State Supreme Court Elections: Competition and Context as Democratic Incentives
4. Justices on the Ballot
5. Contextualizing Varnum v. Brien: A Moment in History;Cain;Journal of Gender Race and Justice,2009
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献