Litigant campaign contributions to sitting judges correlate with pending cases.

Evidence

At times, special interests have blatantly tried to buy influence on a court. While an 11 billion lawsuit by Pennzoil against Texaco was pending before the Texas Supreme Court, Texaco representatives made campaign contributions totaling 72,000 to members of the court, and Pennzoil’s lawyers responded by contributing more than $315,000 to the justices. But such blatant efforts to influence judicial votes through contributions are rare. More frequently, groups contribute to the campaigns of judicial candidates that they believe are generally sympathetic to their views or seek to defeat candidates whose views they oppose. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 420

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Voter backlash can remove judges who sit on cases involving their benefactors — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 584; Party influence on judges works through shared values, not direct commands — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 605; Advocacy before the Court correlates with later appointment — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 605

Broader Connections

• Voter backlash can remove judges who sit on cases involving their benefactors #expands (0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 584
• Party influence on judges works through shared values, not direct commands #complicates (0.75) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 605