Other Judicial Election Websites
There are many different websites which provide information on the judicial election process, or on the state court system generally. Some of them openly advocate for certain reforms or ideologies, while others merely provide information. You can also visit your own state’s Secretary of State website for more information about judicial elections.
Here is a partial list of other sites which discuss judicial elections:
I. Sites which provide information on state court judges and state court systems:
This is a Wiki site which provides information about every state’s judicial system and judicial selection process. It also includes information about federal judges and courts.
II. Sites which provide information on judicial candidates
A. “Neutral” sites
These are sites which, like Choose Your Judges, appear to have no ideological or political leanings—they merely present information to the voter to assist him or her in making an informed decision. Some of them provide advice as to which judge to vote for, or whether or not to retain a judge, but the advice is based on a neutral evaluation of the candidate rather than a specific political agenda.
An online list of neutral voter guides for each state is provided by the American Judicature Society.
This site is a good example of a state-based judicial evaluation project. It provides comprehensive information and recommendations for retention for all the judges on the ballot in the state of Colorado. It is sponsored by the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System, which conducts its own evaluations of judges and then provides recommendations based on those evaluations.
This is another example of a state-based judicial evaluation project, this time for the state of Washington. It is a little more basic than Know Your Judge, since it does not rate or evaluate judges itself; instead, it serves as a clearinghouse for the recommendations and endorsements of other groups.
This site gathers endorsements and information about judicial candidates in and around the city of Chicago. It is much more basic than the first two, doing little more than providing the endorsements of various interest groups.
This site gathers endorsements and information about judicial candidates in and around Cleveland Ohio.
B. Ideologically-driven sites
These are examples of websites which openly advocating for judges who have specific kinds of judicial philosophies or political beliefs.
This site bills itself as “A Project of Citizens for Community Values,” and it provides recommendations for conservative voters for every level of local election in Ohio, including judges.
This site covers judicial elections in southern California, with the goal of electing judges who are “strict constructionists” and getting rid of “judicial activists” (judges who are “political opportunists who have a political agenda”)
III. Sites which support reforming the judicial selection process
This organization “educates Americans about the crucial role of state and federal courts, defends judges from threats and intimidation, promotes diversity, and advocates reforms to keep campaign cash out of the courtroom.” It seems to focus on the impact of money in state judicial elections, but also provides useful information about all levels of courts and advocates for other judicial reforms as well, such as reducing the backlog of federal judge appointments.
This organization seeks to “limit the role of politics in the selection of state judges.” The website provides comprehensive information about each state’s judicial election process, a history of reform efforts in each state, and information about each state’s current judicial campaigns.
This site focuses on Pennsylvania courts and is dedicated to adopting an appointment selection process for the state.