Subscribe Subscribe   Find us on Twitter Follow POL on Twitter  



Featured Discussion underway now

As I indicated before the holidays, we are fortunate to have two outstanding legal thinkers kick off our year with a discussion of judicial election and selection systems. Following the excesses of the past year's judicial elections, are we better off with an appointment system, whether or not akin to the federal model? Are electoral systems -- which are unlikely to go away in the many states where they exist -- capable of producing good judges?

Helping us answer these questions are Alex Tabarrok and David Rottman. Alex is a professor of economics at George Mason; many of you may know him from the weblog Marginal Revolution, which he runs with Tyler Cowen. Along with Claremont McKenna's Eric Helland, Alex authored "The Effect of Electoral Institutions on Tort Awards," which examined whether partisan elected judges redistributed wealth from out-of-state defendants to in-state plaintiffs.

David is Principal Court Research Consultant at the National Center for State Courts. For almost 20 years, he has examined American courts. In 2000, the NCSC issued an exhaustive study, "Call to Action: Statement of the National Summit On Improving Judicial Selection" (PDF). The study includes both comprehensive data on varying election/selection systems around the nation as well as 20 proposals for reform.

Our discussion kicks off this week (here). We hope you'll find it interesting!



Rafael Mangual
Project Manager,
Legal Policy

Manhattan Institute


Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.