Evidence from Commission and Gubernatorial Choices
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 October 2022
Does merit selection work? Existing evidence on institutional performance compares outcomes of interest across selection mechanisms, which does not account for the two-stage process that makes merit selection unique. Using information obtained from public records requests, this article analyzes the determinants of commission and gubernatorial selections from relevant candidate pools. The evidence suggests that although commissions and governors seem to select on certain qualifications, women are disadvantaged at the commission stage and partisanship is relevant at both stages. The results have important implications for our understanding of merit selection’s institutional performance and the broader judicial selection debate.
Previous versions of this article were presented at the 2016 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association in Philadelphia and the 2017 annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association in Chicago. Thanks to Nancy Arrington, Joshua Boston, Damon Cann, David Klein, Josh Ryan, Jeffrey Segal, and the anonymous reviewers for helpful comments and discussions; Dillon Corbridge and Madelyn Fife for helpful research assistance; and the American Political Science Association for financial assistance.