A few weeks ago, I spoke with a friend considering a run for judge; someone smart, experienced, community-minded, and deeply ethical. The kind of person you’d want making life-altering decisions from the bench.
But there was one problem: the cost of running.
To mount a serious campaign for a judicial seat in Michigan, candidates are told to expect a price tag north of $100,000. Between filing fees, signage, advertising, mailers, and the social currency of “looking viable,” it’s a steep, almost impossible climb unless you’re already independently wealthy or well-connected to donors.
And that’s where the real problem begins.
Justice Shouldn’t Be Pay-to-Play
Think about it: if the only people who can afford to run for judge are those who can self-fund or court major political donors, we’ve essentially privatized the judiciary.
That effectively means:
- Working-class attorneys, public defenders, and reform-minded advocates are shut out.
- Communities lose diversity of background, thought, and lived experience.
- The bench becomes an echo chamber of affluence, not a reflection of the public it serves.
And when the price tag for “justice” starts at six figures, it’s no longer a public service; it’s a buy-in. There is no other way to describe it than pay-to-play.
The Cost of Staying “Impartial”
Judicial candidates are technically supposed to remain nonpartisan, but in practice, every campaign requires political fundraising. The Michigan Campaign Finance Act still governs these races, and that means every dollar is scrutinized, every endorsement becomes a liability, and every “neutral” stance costs time and money to maintain.
To even appear on the ballot, candidates must gather signatures, attend endless meet-and-greets, hire consultants, and print thousands of glossy mailers, not to mention pay for legal compliance, advertising, and media outreach.
By the time a candidate gets to Election Day, they’re not just tired; they’re indebted.
And if they lose? They walk away not only discouraged, but often financially ruined.
How We Can Fix It
If Michigan wants a judiciary that represents everyone, not just the wealthy few, it’s time for bold structural reform.
Here’s where to start:
Public Financing for Judicial Races
Implement a public campaign fund. Similar to systems used in states like Maine and Connecticut, implement a campaign fund that that provides qualifying candidates with public dollars once they demonstrate grassroots support. This removes the donor-driven bias and opens the door for candidates who aren’t independently wealthy. Michigan has it for political candidates, why not for judicial seats? Especially as funding can be a significant barrier to a good candidate.
Lower the Filing Barriers
Reduce or waive filing fees for candidates running for judicial office, especially those coming from public defense, nonprofit, or legal aid backgrounds. Serving the public shouldn’t bankrupt you before you begin or require you to be wealthy.
Strengthen Transparency Rules for Contributions
Enforce strict limits on contributions from law firms, political action committees, and major corporate donors who regularly appear before judges. Justice should never be a return on investment.
Introduce Judicial Term Rotation or Appointment by Merit
Allow periodic appointments by nonpartisan commissions based on merit and community service, rather than campaign funding capacity. Rotate judicial assignments to discourage local fiefdoms and encourage accountability.
Create a Judicial Candidate Resource Fund
Offer mentorship, communications support, and campaign training for first-time candidates, particularly women, people of color, and public defenders who often face structural barriers to entry.
Why It Matters
If the bench is only open to those who can afford it, justice will never be blind; it’ll just be branded.
Michigan’s next generation of judges shouldn’t have to choose between doing good and going flat broke. And until we stop treating judicial campaigns like luxury items, we’ll just keep getting a justice system that serves the few rather than the many.
Because the truth is simple: We can’t have an equitable justice system when the price of admission is $100,000.
