The Ohio Supreme Court: Justices for Sale?
Posted by Peter Lattman

ohioA few weeks back the New York Times penned an editorial lamenting judicial elections and the skyrocketing amounts of money being spent on these races. Little did we know it foreshadowed Sunday’s 4,700-word stunner on the Ohio Supreme Court. An NYT investigation found that the Buckeye State’s justices routinely heard cases after receiving campaign contributions from the parties involved or from groups that filed supporting briefs. On average, they voted in favor of contributors 70 percent of the time.

Even sitting justices in Ohio question the current system. “I never felt so much like a hooker down by the bus station in any race I’ve ever been in as I did in a judicial race,” said Justice Paul Pfeifer. “Everyone interested in contributing has very specific interests.” Of the special interests, Justice Pfeifer says: “They mean to be buying a vote . . . Whether they succeed or not, it’s hard to say.”

Chief Justice Thomas Moyer also admits to flaws in the election process. “In a perfect world,” he said, “you would have justices being selected not based on the amount of money their campaign committees can raise from various interests, but on their character and record — and somewhat on judicial philosophy, certainly, but in a more abstract way.”
Read more: Judges
Permalink | Trackback URL: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2006/10/03/the-ohio-supreme-court-justices-for-sale/trackback/

Comments