CAP en Español
Small CAP Banner

Idea of the Day: Disclosure Laws Are Essential to the Transparency of Judicial Elections

  • print icon
  • SHARE:
  • Facebook icon
  • Twitter icon
  • Share on Google+
  • Email icon
idea light bulb

As this year’s election approaches, political attack ads are flooding the airwaves, fueled by unprecedented sums of money from corporations and wealthy individuals funding “independent” political ads. Much of the money is funneled through nonprofit orga­nizations that do not disclose their donors.

Although disclosure laws usually apply to elections for all branches of government, judicial elections involve unique interests that make the need for transparency in cam­paign finance even greater than in other elections.

In a series of cases striking down campaign finance reform laws, federal courts have opened the door to unlimited political spending by ostensibly “independent” groups. The U.S. Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission overruled a 1990 case that thwarted an attempt by the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, a non­profit corporation under Michigan law, to spend its general treasury funds on political ads in the local newspaper. Since 2000 the organization has become a major player in judicial races, having purchased $14 million in ads for Michigan Supreme Court candi­dates—$14 million, which was not reported under state law.

The rapid rise in unlimited independent spending is even more alarming when the politicians in question are judges, who are supposed to be true to the law, not to campaign contributors. Voters are not surprised when legislators are responsive to their campaign donors, but in a courtroom, ordinary citizens should stand on the same footing as those most powerful in our society. Justice is supposed to be blind, but polls suggest Americans are concerned that campaign cash will influence judges’ rulings.

For more on this topic, please see:

To speak with our experts on this topic, please contact:

Print: Liz Bartolomeo (poverty, health care)
202.481.8151 or

Print: Tom Caiazza (foreign policy, energy and environment, LGBT issues, gun-violence prevention)
202.481.7141 or

Print: Allison Preiss (economy, education)
202.478.6331 or

Print: Tanya Arditi (immigration, Progress 2050, race issues, demographics, criminal justice, Legal Progress)
202.741.6258 or

Print: Chelsea Kiene (women's issues,, faith)
202.478.5328 or

Print: Beatriz Lopez (Center for American Progress Action Fund)
202.741.6255 or

Spanish-language and ethnic media: Rafael Medina
202.478.5313 or

TV: Rachel Rosen
202.483.2675 or

Radio: Sally Tucker
202.481.8103 or


This is part of a regular column: Idea of the Day

For more from the same column, click here