James L. Gibson is an intellectual giant in the field of judicial politics, and Electing Judges may be his most important contribution to date. This is a first-rate piece of scholarship that speaks directly to the central arguments in a highly contentious ongoing debate. For all interested in the judicial selection process, Gibson’s evidence is powerful and simply cannot be ignored.

"An important work full of insights and surprises—and one that has significant policy implications."

"Judicial independence is one of our most sacred institutional values, and the means of securing it in state courts has been a source of continuing debate. Gibson’s writing is superb, distilling arcane analytical and theoretical issues to show that, contrary to widely held views, people are more willing to accept the decisions of judges when they have the power to reject those who perform poorly, and thus elections build rather than corrode legitimacy. Electing Judges is a monumental achievement."

"Electing Judges represents a perfect nexus between theoretically driven political science scholarship and real-world politics. Using evidence from survey experiments while remaining agnostic in the normative debate, Gibson disproves the conventional wisdom about how Americans perceive judges, courts, and the judicial selection process. This superbly crafted work should be the cornerstone of any serious discussion of judicial power and institutional reform."

“Although there have been many doomsday scenarios put forth by those opposed to judicial elections, there is virtually no empirical evidence—positive or negative—regarding the effects of politicized judicial campaigns on judicial legitimacy. Enter James L. Gibson’s book,  Electing Judges. Using both experimental vignettes and panel surveys, Gibson has written one of the most important books on the effects of judicial elections. Indeed, it may be the most important book on the topic since Dubois’s From Ballot to Bench.”

“This careful study dispels a number of myths about popular attitudes toward the courts and is a major contribution to the debate over state judicial selection. A number of states are currently reconsidering how they select their judges. Gibson’s careful study can—and should–make a significant contribution to those deliberations.”

"Simply put, this book provides an extremely important theoretical and empirical contribution to the study of judicial elections and legitimacy. It also contains numerous normative, policy, and institutional implications relevant to how we select our judges in the US. Gibson does a superb job of addressing claims by opponents of judicial elections in an objective, balanced fashion and the variety of research designs and data analyses only boosts the validity of his conclusions. Gibson also does a masterful job of elaborating on the substantive implications of his findings. On the whole, the book is extremely well written, well executed, and well argued."

“Social science at its best combines theoretical rigor with methodological precision to provide answers to pressing real-world questions, and that is what Gibson delivers in this book. In Electing Judges, Gibson has delivered a path-breaking and provocative book that serves as a reasoned empirical response to a good deal of conventional wisdom. It promises to be of interest to those who study law and courts, the effect of campaigns on the views and opinions of citizens, the underpinnings of judicial legitimacy, or state politics.”

“Electing Judges provides valuable insight into our understanding of state supreme courts and the nexus between campaigning and perceptions of legitimacy of state supreme courts. The theoretical development and sophisticated empirical analyses are creative and carefully executed. This is a book that will be of value not only to state court scholars but to those with an interest in courts more generally, as well as to those who study public opinion, elections, and the connections between public attitudes and institutional legitimacy.”