Selection method produces few but patterned differences in judicial voting.

Evidence

Taking similar cases in various states, some found … But some studies have uncovered differences: appointed judges were more likely to vindicate the rights of defendants in criminal procedure cases and more likely to uphold claims of sex discrimination. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 633

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Merit selection replaces partisan appointment with commission nomination — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 606; Impeachment rarely removes judges, so states added elections and term limits. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 376; Ideology has replaced patronage in appeals court selection since recent decades (+6 more)

Broader Connections

• Group interaction only marginally changes judges’ established voting patterns #corroborates (0.78) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2623
• Judicial votes systematically divide along liberal and conservative lines #expands (0.72) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2579
• Conference discussion rarely changes a justice’s vote because format discourages interchange #qualifies (0.70) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1562