Book Review: "The Impact of Judicial Selection Method on Supreme Court Ruling"

Tchaikovsky Sounds Funny

This book presents arguments that the manner in which state Supreme Court Justices ascend to office, either by public election, Gubernatorial appointment, or legislatively selected, impacts their tendencies to decide cases in several legal areas. This conclusion differs from general Political Science thought that the manner in which Justices are picked for office makes little to no difference on how they ultimately decide cases.
The author concludes that groups with little political and/or economic power fare best with Supreme Court Justices who are appointed. This is important as members of these powerless groups require innovative state Supreme Court decisions to obtain remedies they have been unable to achieve from conservative leaning federal courts. Elected state Supreme Court Justices tend to make more traditional stances and shun the innovative decisions.

The book examines state Supreme Court decisions on similar issues in business law, criminal law, and family law in six states: two with elected Justices (Pennsylvania and West Virginia), two with Gubernatorial appointed Justices (New Jersey and Connecticut), and two states where legislatures select the Justices (Virginia and Rhode Island). 36 issues were chosen. This is a statistically signficiant sample size. Considering the multitude of decisions these courts make and the subjectiveness in comparing decisions where specific facts may vary, the argument can continue as to whether these conclusions may be broadly reached and whether these differences would occur in different times. Still, this is a remarkable study that combines case studies and backs these studies backed with statistical evidence. It is highly recommended to those wishing to learn more about Supreme Court decisions.