Skip to Content

Editor’s Note - Order in the Court

As we note in introducing our interview with her, former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor still has plenty of opinions. In addition to commending to you her views on civic education, she’s been a leading voice on the unhealthy impact of elections on judicial independence—the principle that courts should be protected from improper influence from other branches of government or from private or partisan interests. Consider that 87 percent of all state court judges face elections, and 39 states elect at least some of their judges.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s January ruling on corporate contributions in elections all but guarantees the injection of massive corporate wealth into our political system, and has the potential to drown out the voices of public education advocates throughout the nation.

Justice O’Connor (and even John Grisham in The Appeal) have offered interesting insights. We at NEA are watching how the Court’s ruling and ensuing reactions play out, and continue to assess how this affects the Association and our members. In the meantime, what’s your opinion? Is the ruling sound? Or will it damage the integrity of elections? Share your thoughts here.

Editor Doug Walker

Published in:

Published In