Welcome to Justice at Stake’s Transition Site

Justice at Stake is redesigning its Web site, and because of growing time delays on our old site, we have established this temporary home page for the next few months. You can access most features you need from this site, including news releases, “New Politics” and other JAS publications, polls, and Gavel Grab, Justice at Stake’s daily online journal about issues affecting fair, impartial courts. For other materials, you can still visit our original site, but expect significant delays. For immediate help in finding Justice at Stake material, please e-mail us, call (202) 588-9700. 

Jurists, Business Leaders, Groups File in Landmark Fair-Courts Case

On January 5, 2009, an unprecedented array of jurists, business leaders and civic reform groups filed briefs in Caperton v. Massey,  a landmark case involving campaign contributions and fair, impartial courts. They urged the U.S. Supreme Court to declare that in some cases judges must step aside when major financial supporters come to court. The filers included 27 former state Supreme Court justices, a business group with support from Intel, Lockheed Martin, Pepsi and Wal-Mart, and a host of reform groups including the Brennan Center for Justice and Justice at Stake. For a release with excerpts from the briefs, click here.

Supreme Court to Hear Caperton Case

In a potentially landmark ethics case, the Supreme Court will decide whether campaign spending by a mining executive should have forced a West Virginia justice to step aside from a case involving the executive's company. See Gavel Grab for details.

11/14/08: Bert Brandenburg Piece in Slate

Slate Article Puts Focus on Merit Selection and Business
Should business invest itself in a growing campaign against merit selection of judges? That’s the topic of “What’s the Best Way to Pack a Court?,”  an article by Justice at Stake Executive Director Bert Brandenburg that appears today in Slate Magazine.  Brandenburg suggests that the campaign’s real goal is to open up new courts to elections  that can be swayed by outside groups. But he adds that many business leaders aren’t biting on the anti-merit pitch. To see the Slate article, click here. To see a fuller discussion of the article in Gavel Grab, click here.

11/5/08: 2008 Supreme Court Elections: More Money, More Nastiness

State elections for Supreme Court justices ended 2008 much as they began, punctuated by runaway spending, partisan pressure, angry accusations and costly, secretly-funded ads by third-party special interests that often drowned out the candidates.

In the final week before the race, almost $5 million was spent on television advertising nationally. Even though several Supreme Court races were uncontested, more money was spent on advertising than in 2006, according to data compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice. [Click here for more of the release]

Justice at Stake Highlights

Notice

We are creating a new web site. For the next few months, please use this site to access Justice at Stake content. You can visit our old site for materials, but expect delays.