The Appeal and Caperton Case Research Assignment
The 5-8 page paper based on The Appeal and the Caperton case should describe how (1)The Appeal informs us about the politics of judicial elections and (2)whether Kennedy's opinion of the court in Caperton or Roberts' and Scalia's dissents provide stronger justifications for how courts should address the problem of campaign contributions in judicial elections. Your paper must draw upon details in the novel that shed light on the politics of judicial elections. Don't just summarize the plot of the novel. While some summary is obviously relevant your paper should focus on what we learn about judicial elections from this work of fiction. For example, what are the tactics and strategies used to defeat Sheila McCarthy? Why is she so vulnerable to the tactics designed to defeat her? Why are they successful? Why do the voters seem so susceptible to the tactics and strategies designed to defeat McCarthy? Short quotes from the novel that illustrate these points would be appropriate. Your paper should also draw upon the opinions written in the Caperton case. The paper should be prepared as a Word document, double spaced with about 300 words per page and thus be between 1500 and 2400 words not including any prefatory material (name, class, etc.) or footnotes and references
The Appeal and Caperton Case
Your name
Your Institution of Affiliation
September 17, 2017
Introduction
In the article presented in the “Writ of certiorari to the supreme court of appeals of West Virginia”, regarding the Caperton v. Massey Coal Company, a case study about the trial court judgment between the two entities was narrated and discussed with regards to the issues raised regarding Judicial elections. More Specifically, this case stated that during the proceedings of the court case between Caperton v. Massey Coal Company, the original jury verdict was that Massey Coal Company should pay $50 million for “fraudulent misrepresentation, concealment, and tortious interference with existing contractual relations” (Legal Information Institute, 2009). However, rather than simply accepting the verdict, the defendants then asked for a reconsideration in the Supreme Court of Appeals, where five justices were employed in order to decide if the verdict should proceed or not. During this process, it was stated that these justices have voted to “reverse the verdict by 3 to 2”, thus stating that the lower court’s decision is incorrect and removing the jury verdict of $50 million in both actual and punitive damages. Nevertheless, during this same proceeding, a motion for recusal was filed against one of the judges since the possibility of a biased decision was not tolerable, especially when it was found that he had received a significant amount during the previous judicial elections prior to the case. However, since he denied the recusal motion, this poses some issues especially in line with the 14th amendment of the United States Constitution, which is aimed at protecting the rights of its citizens. In this article, this issue would be discussed in the succeeding chapters as well as how the judicial elections could become a definite obstacle for the propagation of an impartial and democratic rule of law, despite its ideal purpose of demanding accountably from the elected judges. More specifically, the author would try to expand from a novel written by John Grisham, entitled The Appeal, and then provide an analysis in relation to the real-life case presented above. Nonetheless, before the analysis proceeds, the author of this article believes that even though judicial elections are designed to hold judges accountable and responsible for their decisions, it could also be considered as one of the main flaws of the justice system since it could hinder the attainment of impartial litigation proceedings.
Judicial Elections
According to Lee Sarokin (2014), Judicial elections are usually held in order to uphold their main purpose as well as for the judges to “be responsive and accountable to the public”. Thus, the purpose of judicial elections is just like the national elections where people would elect who we believe would best serve the current needs of the system (Judicial system). However, despite the ideal purpose that they serve, different perspectives about the efficiency of the Judicial elections persists for that fact that just like national elections, there exists a possibility for biasness not only for the elected judge but even the people who voted him. On one hand, many people would argue that this biasness could come from the people who vote, especially when these judges employ a strong propaganda, have a strong personality, or even use extravagant advertising campaigns. On the other hand, this biasness could also exist on the side of the judges during court proceedings, especially when they are making a decision where one of the parties involved has given significant amounts for his campaign. This biasness are just some of the dangers of judicial elections, where Grisham even noted that this is a kind of “Legal maneuvering” of the court’s decision. As according to Cohen (2013), “Judicial elections impair the fair administration of justice by fostering impermissible appearances of impartiality by judicial candidates and judges”.
The Appeal
In line with the novel written by Grisham, the story narrated how even judicial elections could be rigged and politicized in a legal manner in order to maneuver to their expected results. The story started with the case of Baker v. Krane Chemicals, where a jury was just trying to finish their decision with regards to the death of Jeannette’s loved ones as Krane Chemicals had allegedly disposed their wastes into the rivers and thus causing cancer which killed Baker’s loved ones. As the jury finished their decision, the long-awaited verdict has sanctioned Krane Chemicals with “three million in actual damages and thirty-eight million in punitive damages” (Grisham, 2008). However, despite the pl...