Judicial independence from short-run politics drives public acceptance of rulings
Evidence
As a corollary of the first proposition, adjudication implies that the deciding officers are not p’litically accountable to anyone for any particular decision. They act under the restraints of their oath of office and of the normal processes of impeachment for enforcement of the oath but subject otherwise only to their own consciences. ‘This element of the concept of adjudication may be thought to be put into question by the practice in the majority of states of popular election of judges. But the popular election of judges does not in actual practice mean political accountability for particular decisions, nor is it ordinarily so understood. On the contrary, the supposed independence of judges from short-run political pressures is a prime factor in the prestige and the degree of acceptance which judicial decisions enjoy.
— Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 3291
Categorization
DEFINE: Clarifies that adjudicators are not politically accountable per decision, even where judges are popularly elected.
XREF: connects to: Political pressure, not the court judgment alone, deterred an appeal — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up: Environmental…, 84; Judicial independence advocates favor insulated selection and long tenure — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 589; Judicial independence means freedom from improper external pressures. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 374 (+3 more)