The impartial administration of justice and the accountability of
government officials are two of the most strongly held American values.
Yet these values are often in direct conflict with one another.
At the national level, the U.S. Constitution resolves this tension in
favor of judicial independence, insulating judges from the undue
influence of other political institutions, interest groups, and the
general public. But at the state level, debate has continued as to the
proper balance between judicial independence and judicial
accountability. In this volume, constitutional scholar G. Alan Tarr
focuses squarely on that debate. In part, the analysis is historical:
how have the reigning conceptions of judicial independence and
accountability emerged, and when and how did conflict over them develop?
In part, the analysis is theoretical: what is the proper understanding
of judicial independence and accountability?
Tarr concludes the book by identifying the challenges to state-level
judicial independence and accountability that have emerged in recent
decades, assessing the solutions offered by the competing sides, and
offering proposals for how to strike the appropriate balance between
independence and accountability.