A D.C. group pushed voter suppression measures then spent millions to elect the North Carolina Supreme Court justices hearing lawsuits against these changes.
Overly broad state religious freedom restoration acts, or RFRAs, threaten true religious freedom and could have far-reaching negative consequences.
By upholding Florida’s ban on judges directly seeking campaign cash, the Supreme Court recognizes money’s corrosive effect on judicial elections.
Elected judges in Alabama cater to their conservative constituents by defying marriage equality and sentencing convicts to death.
Billy Corriher writes that officials in Alabama are essentially arguing that the Constitution does not apply in their state.
Video This new minidocumentary from Legal Progress showcases the real human impact of special interest money that is infiltrating judicial elections by featuring one North Carolina family’s story of how coal ash pollution poisoned their community.
Most states ban the personal solicitation of campaign cash, but the U.S. Supreme Court will soon decide whether these laws violate judicial candidates’ free speech rights.
Spending on judicial elections reached $15 million in 2014—a record for a midterm election—fueled by money from attorneys and corporate litigants.
Video This new video from Legal Progress documents the damaging effects of Texas’ 2003 tort reform legislation, which makes it virtually impossible for emergency room patients to hold hospitals accountable for medical malpractice.
Fact Sheet The repeal of public financing for judicial candidates could give corporate polluters and other donors more influence in North Carolina courts.
Report Big-money groups in Washington want to protect state legislatures’ agendas from legal challenges.
Issue Brief Judges and legislators fail to address the conflicts of interest inherent in multimillion-dollar judicial elections.
Interactive A CAP analysis finds that states have failed to strengthen their judicial ethics rules to address the growth in campaign cash.
The ruling in McCutcheon v. FEC will give the wealthiest 1 percent even more influence over politicians, including elected judges.