• Home
• Voting & Democracy
  • Go Vote
  • N.C. Voter Guide
  • VoterRadio.com
• Research & Publications
  • Follow the Money
  • NCCVE Research
• Multimedia
  • The Voter Update Podcast
• For the Media
  • News Releases
  • Media Advisories
  • Contact NCCVE
• About Us
  • Board of Directors
  • Staff
  • Contribute to NCCVE
  • Contact Us
• Search

For immediate release.
August 17, 2001
Contact: Jesse Rutledge, N.C. Center for Voter Education,
(919) 839-1200

Report Questions Judicial Independence in N.C.

RALEIGH – A recent national report issued by a committee of the American Bar Association (ABA) calls into question the integrity of judicial systems in states such as North Carolina due to financial pressures arising from competitive elections.

The report, issued by the ABA’s Standing Committee on Judicial Independence, recommends that states that elect judges in contested elections finance judicial elections with public funds, to prevent the perception of impropriety. The report comes at a time when the General Assembly is examining legislation that would provide public funds to candidates for both the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals.

“I’ve been practicing law in North Carolina for over 50 years and I’ve seen first-hand the problems arising from judges having to ask for private money,” said Robert Morgan, a former United States Senator and Chairman of the North Carolina Center for Voter Education. “Let’s get the money out of the courtroom. It doesn’t belong there.”

Spending on court races hit record highs in the 2000 North Carolina elections. For the first time ever, the two candidates for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court spent a combined total of over $1 million. Three candidates spent over $1.2 million for an Associate Justice seat.

The two-year study by the ABA was released in late July. Among its findings:

· To cover their election costs, judges must accept funds from contributors many of whom may be interested in the outcomes of cases before them to cover their election costs
· The cost of judicial campaigns is escalating
· A pervasive public perception exists that campaign contributions influence judicial decision-making
· Qualified candidates who lack connections to wealthy contributors may be impaired in their ability to compete effectively for judicial office

To address these problems, the report suggests that public funding programs be established, and recommends that such programs provide sufficient funding to encourage candidates to voluntarily forego private fundraising.

Support for the report’s conclusions came not only from the non-partisan Center for Voter Education, but from Raleigh attorney A.P. Carlton, who is President-elect of the ABA.

“While there are many threats to judicial independence, the increasing cost of running for the bench raises some of the most serious concerns. Public funding for judicial elections is an effective means to address the problem,” said Carlton. Carlton served as Chair of the ABA’s Standing Committee on Judicial Independence, which released the report.

The N.C. Center for Voter Education is a non-partisan, not-for-profit organization based in Raleigh dedicated to improving the quality and responsiveness of North Carolina’s election system. Former U.S. Senator Robert Morgan serves as chairman of the board.

###