Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.

Campaign finance for judicial elections

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

BP-Initials-UPDATED.png This Ballotpedia article is in need of updates. Please email us if you would like to suggest a revision. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.

Civil Liberties Policy Logo.png
Campaign finance
Campaign finance portal
Campaign finance for political candidates
Campaign finance for ballot measures
Judicial selection overview
Campaign finance agencies
Public Policy Logo-one line.png
Note: This page is not intended to serve as a manual. Individuals who are interested in running for a judicial office should contact their state election agencies for more information about specific filing processes and requirements.


Groups and individuals involved in a judicial election campaign must adhere to that state's campaign finance laws. These laws regulate the amounts and sources of money given or received for political purposes. In addition, campaign finance laws stipulate disclosure requirements for political contributions and expenditures. For instance, state law may require a campaign to disclose the name and address of a donor once his or her contributions to the campaign exceed a certain amount. Similar requirements exist for campaign expenditures.

HIGHLIGHTS
  • Contribution limits vary dramatically from state to state. For instance, Kentucky limits contributions from individuals to $1,000 per candidate per election cycle, while Wisconsin allows up to $20,000 per candidate per election. In eight states, there is no limit to the amount of money an individual may give to a judicial candidate.
  • Of the 30 states that hold supreme court elections, six use partisan elections for their supreme court.
  • Disclosure requirements also vary from state to state. Some states require full disclosure for any contributions, such as in Louisiana, while others only require full disclosure for larger contributions, as in North Dakota.

    • Proponents of more stringent regulations and disclosure requirements, such as the Brennan Center for Justice, claim that current laws do not go far enough to mitigate corruption and the influence of undisclosed special interests. Others, such as the Institute for Free Speech, argue that strict disclosure requirements and contribution limits impinge upon the rights to privacy and free expression.[1][2]

    The laws and regulations that apply to judicial campaigns may differ from those that apply to candidates for political office. To learn more about campaign finance requirements for other candidates, see this page.

    Individual contribution limits

    State regulations

    The amount of money that an individual can legally contribute to a judicial candidate varies considerably from state to state. In some states, contributions are limited per candidate, while others limit total contributions per election across any number of candidates, or within a particular timeframe. The table below lists individual contribution limits to state supreme court candidates as of May 2016. The limit may differ for organizations, parties, corporations, or other entities. For more information about these limits in each state and for limits for other courts, see the state page (by clicking on the state name).

    Of the 30 states that hold elections for supreme court judges, eight allow individuals to contribute an unlimited amount of money to candidates. In the remaining 21 states, the amount an individual may contribute is limited, but the limitations vary dramatically. In the table below, states with no limits are highlighted in yellow, while states with limits over $5,000 are highlighted in light blue.

    Individual contribution limits for state supreme court candidates, 2016
    State Limit
    Alabama No limit
    Arkansas $2,700 per candidate per election
    Florida $3,000 per candidate per election
    Georgia $6,600 per candidate in primary and general elections
    Idaho $5,000 per candidate per election
    Illinois $5,400 per candidate per election cycle
    Indiana No limit
    Iowa No limit
    Kentucky $1,000 per candidate per election cycle
    Louisiana $5,000 per candidate per election
    Michigan $3,400 per election cycle
    Minnesota $2,500 per candidate per two-year period
    Mississippi $5,000 per candidate
    Missouri No limit
    Montana N/A (see this article)
    Nebraska No limit
    Nevada $5,000 per candidate in both primary and general election
    New Mexico $5,400 per candidate per election
    North Carolina $5,100 per election
    North Dakota No limit
    Ohio $3,600 per election
    Oregon No limit
    Pennsylvania No limit
    South Dakota $1,000 per candidate in the election year
    Tennessee $1,500 per candidate per election
    Texas $5,000 per candidate per election
    Washington $2,000 per election
    West Virginia $1,000 per election
    Wisconsin $20,000 per candidate per election cycle
    Wyoming $2,500 per candidate per election

    Disclosure requirements

    State regulations

    All states require that political and campaign committees disclose certain information about contributors. These requirements vary significantly from state to state. In the table below, the uppermost row indicates commonly required disclosure metrics. The leftmost column indicates applicable disclosure thresholds. For example, Florida requires committees to report the contributor name and address for all contributions, regardless of amount. For contributions exceeding $100 in aggregate, a committee must also provide the contributor's occupation. Of the 30 states that hold judicial elections, six states—Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, New Mexico, Ohio, and West Virginia—require some disclosure for any contribution made, no matter the amount. For more information about the reporting requirements and the reporting schedule in each state, see the state page.

    Donor disclosure requirements by state, 2016
    Disclosure thresholds Contributor name Contributor address Amount Occupation Employer Employer address
    Alabama
    $100 in aggregate year-to-date
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Arkansas
    $50 in aggregate for election
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Florida
    All contributions
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    $100 contribution
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Georgia
    $100 aggregate for reporting period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Idaho
    $50 in aggregate year-to-date
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Illinois
    $150 in aggregate for reporting period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    $500 aggregate for reporting period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Indiana
    $100 in aggregate year-to-date ($200 for a party committee)
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    $1,000 in aggregate year-to-date
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Iowa
    $25 in aggregate year-to-date
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Kentucky
    $100 in aggregate for election
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Louisiana
    All contributions
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Michigan
    All contributions
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    $100 in aggregate for election period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Minnesota
    $200 in aggregate year-to-date
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Mississippi
    $200 in aggregate year-to-date
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Missouri
    $25 contribution
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Montana
    $35 in aggregate for reporting period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Nebraska
    $250 in aggregate for election period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Nevada
    $100 in aggregate for reporting period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    New Mexico
    All contributions
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    $250 in aggregate for election
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    North Carolina
    $50 for election period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    North Dakota
    $200 in aggregate for reporting period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    $5,000 in aggregate for reporting period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Ohio
    All contributions
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    $100 contribution
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Oregon
    $100 in aggregate year-to-date
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Pennsylvania
    $50 in aggregate for reporting period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    $250 in aggregate for reporting period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    South Dakota
    $100 in aggregate year-to-date
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Tennessee
    $100 in aggregate
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Texas
    $50 in aggregate for reporting period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    $500 in aggregate for reporting period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Washington
    $25 in aggregate for election period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    $100 in aggregate election period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    West Virginia
    All contributions
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    $250 in aggregate year-to-date
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Wisconsin
    $20 contribution
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    $100 in aggregate year-to-date
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    Wyoming
    $25 in aggregate for reporting period
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}
    {{{1}}}

    Judicial election methods

    Main methods

    The American Judicature Society, founded in 1913, promotes the use of retention elections.

    Methods of judicial selection vary across the United States. In general, there are five main methods of judicial selection:

    • Partisan elections: Judges are elected by the people, and candidates are listed on the ballot alongside a label designating political party affiliation.
    • Nonpartisan elections: Judges are elected by the people, and candidates are listed on the ballot without a label designating party affiliation.
    • Legislative elections: Judges are selected by the state legislature.
    • Gubernatorial appointment: Judges are appointed by the governor. In some cases, approval from the legislative body is required.
    • Assisted appointment, also known as merit selection or the Missouri Plan: A nominating commission reviews the qualifications of judicial candidates and submits a list of names to the governor, who appoints a judge from the list. After serving an initial term, the judge must be confirmed by the people in a yes-no retention election to continue serving.[3]

    Some states also use a mix of these methods. For example, appellate court judges in the state of New York are chosen by assisted appointment, but the state’s trial court judges are chosen in partisan elections.

    Before the mid-1800s, nearly all states admitted to the Union selected their judges by gubernatorial appointment with legislative confirmation, though some opted to select judges by legislative vote alone. In 1832, Mississippi became the first state to implement partisan judicial elections. In 1873, Cook County, Illinois, became the first jurisdiction in the United States to implement nonpartisan judicial elections. In 1940, Missouri became the first state to adopt the assisted appointment method; since then over thirty states have followed suit, using some form of retention elections at some level of their judiciary.[4][5]

    See also: Judicial elections and Judicial selection in the states

    Supreme Courts

    Thirty states hold elections for their supreme courts. Of those 30, only six use partisan elections. The table below shows election methods for state supreme courts. For more information about each state's judicial appointment or election methods for other courts, see the state page.

    State supreme court election method
    State Method
    Alabama Partisan
    Arkansas Nonpartisan
    Florida Retention
    Georgia Nonpartisan
    Idaho Nonpartisan
    Illinois Partisan
    Indiana Retention
    Iowa Retention
    Kentucky Nonpartisan
    Louisiana Partisan
    Michigan Nonpartisan
    Minnesota Nonpartisan
    Mississippi Nonpartisan
    Missouri Retention
    Montana Nonpartisan
    Nebraska Retention
    Nevada Nonpartisan
    New Mexico Partisan
    North Carolina Nonpartisan
    North Dakota Nonpartisan
    Ohio Partisan primary, nonpartisan general
    Oregon Nonpartisan
    Pennsylvania Partisan
    South Dakota Retention
    Tennessee Retention
    Texas Partisan
    Washington Nonpartisan
    West Virginia Nonpartisan
    Wisconsin Nonpartisan
    Wyoming Retention

    News feed

    The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Campaign finance judicial. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

    Campaign finance for judicial elections - Google News

    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ Institute for Free Speech, "Money in Politics," accessed September 4, 2017
    2. ↑ Brennan Center for Justice, "Money in Politics," accessed September 4, 2017
    3. ↑ American Bar Association, "Judicial Selection: The Process of Choosing Judges," June 2008
    4. ↑ American Judicature Society, "History of Reform Efforts," archived October 2, 2014
    5. ↑ NYU Press, "The Study of Judicial Elections," accessed December 27, 2014
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Campaign_finance_for_judicial_elections&oldid=9092342"