SGER: Money, Politics, and the Legitimacy of State Supreme Courts: The Impact of Recusals and Disqualifications

SGER：金钱、政治和州最高法院的合法性：回避和取消资格的影响

• 批准号: 0915106
• 负责人: James Gibson
• 金额: $ 9.87万
• 依托单位: Washington University
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2009
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2009-04-01 至 2010-03-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0915106&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: SGER; Money; Politics; Legitimacy; State

The legitimacy of state high courts has become increasingly fragile as a result of politicized elections for the judges sitting on these courts. One of the most threatening of the many recent developments is conflicts of interest (real and apparent) that arise when those litigating before a court are the very same individuals and institutions contributing money to the judges during their election campaigns. Many believe that such contributions fundamentally undermine the legitimacy of elected courts. In no instance is this conflict more severe than in the case of Caperton v Massey, a decision from the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeal, to which the U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari. This case involves a crucial vote to overturn a $50,000,000 lower court judgment against Massey by a justice who received large campaign contributions from the Massey side during the preceding judicial election. Using this context, our goals in this project include: (1) determining how much legitimacy the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeal enjoys; (2) assessing whether that legitimacy is affected by the campaign contribution controversy; (3) investigating whether the contribution issue taints only the implicated justice or whether more general institutional consequences arise; (4) determining whether recusals rehabilitate an offending justice; (5) testing hypotheses about the specific attributes of campaign contributions that influence perceptions of judicial impartiality, and hence of the legitimacy of courts; (6) conducting all of this analysis within the context of an expectancy theory of courts that recognizes that some citizens have come to expect that the judiciary should act in a reasonably ideological fashion; and (7) investigating whether the intervention of the U.S. Supreme Court affects perceptions of the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeal via "legitimacy conferring" processes. This project is based upon a two-wave panel survey of the residents of West Virginia.

由于州高等法院法官的政治化选举，其合法性变得越来越脆弱。最近许多事态发展中最具威胁性的问题之一是利益冲突（真实的和明显的），当在法庭上提起诉讼的人和在竞选期间向法官捐款的同一个人和机构时，就会出现利益冲突。许多人认为，这种贡献从根本上损害了民选法院的合法性。这种冲突在卡珀顿诉梅西一案中最为严重，该案是西弗吉尼亚州最高法院上诉法院的一项裁决，美国最高法院已向该案授予调卷令。此案涉及推翻下级法院针对梅西的 50,000,000 美元判决的关键投票，该判决由一名法官做出，该法官在上一次司法选举期间从梅西一方获得了大量竞选捐款。 在此背景下，我们在该项目中的目标包括：（1）确定西弗吉尼亚州最高法院上诉法院享有多少合法性； (2) 评估其合法性是否受到竞选捐款争议的影响； （3）调查捐款问题是否仅损害了涉案正义，或者是否产生了更普遍的制度后果； (4) 确定回避是否可以使违规法官恢复名誉； (5) 检验有关竞选捐款具体属性的假设，这些属性影响对司法公正性的看法，从而影响法院的合法性； (6) 在法院预期理论的背景下进行所有这些分析，该理论承认一些公民已经开始期望司法机构应该以合理的意识形态方式行事； (7) 调查美国最高法院的干预是否通过“合法性赋予”程序影响了西弗吉尼亚州最高法院上诉法院的看法。该项目基于对西弗吉尼亚州居民的两波小组调查。