Question

Which of the following is true with respect to the rate at which sitting judges face challengers in nonpartisan judicial elections?

A) Sitting judges rarely face challengers in nonpartisan judicial elections.

B) The rate at which sitting judges face challengers is consistently high in nonpartisan judicial elections.

C) Nonpartisan judicial elections do not allow for challengers against sitting judges.

D) The rate at which sitting judges face challengers varies widely in nonpartisan judicial elections.

E) Sitting judges always face challengers in nonpartisan judicial elections.

Answer 1

The rate at which sitting judges face challengers in nonpartisan judicial elections varies widely.

Step-by-step explanation:

The correct answer is D) The rate at which sitting judges face challengers varies widely in nonpartisan judicial elections.

In nonpartisan judicial elections, the rate at which sitting judges face challengers can vary significantly. Some sitting judges rarely face challengers in these elections, while others consistently face challengers. Therefore, it is not accurate to say that sitting judges always face challengers or that nonpartisan judicial elections do not allow for challengers against sitting judges.

For example, in Texas, where judicial elections are partisan, there has been a push to end partisan judicial elections and potentially switch to nonpartisan elections. However, the likelihood of this change happening is low, suggesting that nonpartisan judicial elections may not guarantee challengers for sitting judges.