Select a State:

Judicial Selection in the States: Ohio

Overview

News

The Montana House State Administration Committee yesterday approved a bill to require judges recuse from cases due to campaign contributions. Under HB 157 as approved...

Read More...

A plan to require Wyoming judicial nominating commission members to be subject to senate confirmation appears to have died. Wyoming s top courts use a...

Read More...

This is proving to be an unprecedented year in terms of the number of efforts to either switch from partisan to nonpartisan judicial elections or...

Read More...

Courtesy of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of...

Read More...

The Ohio judiciary is composed of two appellate courts--the supreme court and the court of appeals, and three trial courts--the court of common pleas, the county court, and the municipal court. The court of common pleas is the court of general jurisdiction. Judges in Ohio are selected in nonpartisan elections, which means that party affiliations are not listed on the ballot. However, political parties have a prominent role in selecting judges since judicial candidates are nominated in partisan primary elections and are endorsed by political parties.

Not only are political parties involved in judicial selection in Ohio, but at an increasing rate so are special interest groups. In 2000, Citizens for a Strong Ohio, a group backed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, spent an estimated $4 million on advertisements opposing the reelection of a sitting supreme court justice, and the Chamber itself spent between $1 and $2 million. Citizens for an Independent Court, a group supported by trial lawyers and labor unions, spent approximately $1.5 million in 2000. In 2002, independent groups spent an estimated $5 million on television ads depicting various candidates as pro-workers, pro-business, and pro-family. In 2004, the state legislature adopted broad disclosure requirements for groups that raise and spend money to influence elections.