This article proceeds in four stages. Part I examines the major rulings, relating to tort reform and school funding, that prompted the harsh and expensive Ohio campaign. Part II compares the process for appointing federal judges, particularly Supreme Court justices, which has also become notably contentious over the past three decades. Part III discusses the trend away from strict limitations on campaign speech by judicial candidates, which combined with the expansive protections afforded to independent expenditures in election campaigns will facilitate sharp rhetoric by those inclined in that direction. Finally, Part IV assesses the prospects for elevating the level of discourse in judicial selection.


Judicial Selection

Publication Date


Document Type


Place of Original Publication

Capital University Law Review

Publication Information

30 Capital University Law Review 523 (2002)


COinS Jonathan L. Entin Faculty Bio