Spending in Judicial Elections: State Trends in the Wake of Citizens United

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Carmen Lo, Katie Londenberg and David Nims
dc.coverage.spatial USA
dc.date.accessioned 2016-01-07T15:29:08Z
dc.date.available 2016-01-07T15:29:08Z
dc.identifier.uri http://desa1.cejamericas.org:8080/handle/2015/3445
dc.description.abstract Reseña:This report was prepared at the request of the California Assembly Judiciary Committeeto explore the ways in which states have responded to Citizens United to protect theindependence of their judiciaries, and to analyze the applicability of those responses toCalifornia. The report summarizes the results of a 50 state survey of state responses andidentifies eight common proposals in state legislation, which are ranked in order from the mostexpedient and politically feasible for California to the least: (1) reporting and disclosurerequirements, (2) recusal and disqualification rules, (3) contribution limits, (4) banning foreigncontributions, (5) shareholder or board consent requirements, (6) public financing of judicialcampaigns, (7) merit selection, and (8) resolutions calling for a federal constitutional amendmentto reverse Citizens United. This report considers each of type of proposal, its benefits andlimitations, its constitutionality and feasibility, and its applicability to California. The reportconcludes with candid recommendations pertaining to each category of legislation.This report was prepared at the request of the California Assembly Judiciary Committee to explore the ways in which states have responded to Citizens United to protect the  independence of their judiciaries, and to analyze the applicability of those responses to  California. The report summarizes the results of a 50 state survey of state responses and  identifies eight common proposals in state legislation, which are ranked in order from the most  expedient and politically feasible for California to the least: (1) reporting and disclosure  requirements, (2) recusal and disqualification rules, (3) contribution limits, (4) banning foreign  contributions, (5) shareholder or board consent requirements, (6) public financing of judicial  campaigns, (7) merit selection, and (8) resolutions calling for a federal constitutional amendment  to reverse Citizens United. This report considers each of type of proposal, its benefits and  limitations, its constitutionality and feasibility, and its applicability to California. The report  concludes with candid recommendations pertaining to each category of legislation.           
dc.language.iso English
dc.title Spending in Judicial Elections: State Trends in the Wake of Citizens United
dc.ceja.source Fuente: California Assembly Judiciary Committee


Files in this item

Thumbnail Files: Spending-In-Judicial-Elections.pdf
Size: 1.445Mb
Format: PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record