Judicial elections mean big money can buy justice

We’re putting judicial elections on trial. Critics worry that state judges taking campaign contributions from donors can’t be impartial if those donors end up one day in their courts. That feeds the perception that money is buying justice. But others disagree, saying judicial elections are the best, most democratic and transparent way to select judges. They say there is no evidence that campaign money sways judges in court. Joining Ali Velshi to dispute that is Lynn Marks, the executive director of Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts, a court watchdog group based in Philadelphia.