Abstract
The 2000 Ohio Supreme Court election renewed interest in judicial selection reform. The election was noted for interest group issue advocacy and undisclosed campaign spending. Advocacy groups spent millions attempting to unseat incumbent Justice Alice Robie Resnick, leaving the impression that Ohio justice is controlled by special interests and trial lawyers. The uses of negative campaigning and issue advocacy seemed to confirm suspicions that the Ohio Supreme Court had become dependent on campaign contributions from those with cases before the court. After the election, legal academics and public interest organizations began discussing changes to Ohio’s semi-partisan system. Legal scholarship focused on the appearance of corruption and loss of judicial independence, and public interest organizations began discussing merit selection and campaign finance reform.
Recommended Citation
Marion, Nancy; Farmer, Rick; and Moore, Todd
(2005)
"Financing Ohio Supreme Court Elections 1992-2002: Campaign Finance and Judicial Selection,"
Akron Law Review: Vol. 38:
Iss.
3, Article 3.
Available at:
https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol38/iss3/3