Caperton V. Massey Case Study

In 1998, Hugh Caperton filed a lawsuit against A.T. Massey Coal Co., Inc and was found liable for $50 million in damages in a state trial court in West Virginia. Prior to the hearing, Caperton motioned for the presiding justice in the case, Brent Benjamin, to recuse himself, seeing as though Massey’s C.E.O. had donated nearly $3 million dollars to Benjamin’s campaign. In 2009, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Benjamin’s failure to recuse himself, seeing as he had a personal connection to one of the parties in the case, was a direct violation of the Due Process Clause stated in the fourth teeth amendment (CAPERTON v. A.T. MASSEY COAL CO., INC.). The Caperton v. Massey case proposed the question, “how much power and impact does election campaigning have on judicial bias. Should state judges be appointed over elected?” There are several points made about electing versus appointing. Such as the benefits and downfalls, should Texas judges be appointed, …show more content…
Partisan elections have tremendous benefits and negatives. By allowing the public to elect their judges, they are given the power to select judges that are most similar to them and can properly represent them. It gives the public the power to have a representative that share their common values and remove judges that do not. So by allowing the people the authority to ultimately determine the job security of a judge, it also forces judges to be friendlier to the public while also being more productive and proactive when it comes to cases. However, along with benefits of electing comes the negative side of electing. Although voters are looking for a judge that they can relate to and represent them the best, they are overlooking the educational background and credentials of those running. There is also the possibility of judges being elected primarily on their party affiliation alone and not on their platform or