It’s official: Michigan has the worst judicial election system in U.S.

In case you missed it, critics who say Michigan has the worst judicial selection process in the nation were vindicated by a report released yesterday that scrutinized state-by-state election systems.

Here’s the report from AP’s Kathy Barks Hoffman:

“Michigan had the nation’s costliest state court races in the 2010 election cycle, with most of the money coming from outside groups that paid for a flurry of negative campaign ads, according to a report released Thursday by a judicial watchdog group.

“The Michigan Supreme Court race accounted for a quarter of the $38.4 million spent nationally in 2009-10, according to the report prepared by the Justice at Stake Campaign, the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law and the National Institute of Money in State Politics.

“Because Michigan doesn’t require outside groups to disclose what they’re spending on TV ads, the court race could have cost as much as $11.1 million, it said.  

“Besides having the highest amount of spending, Michigan also was cited for having the highest total TV spending and the largest number of negative ads aired.

“’More than ever, a small number of super-spenders played a dominant role in influencing who sits on state supreme courts. Much of this influence was exercised secretly,’ the report said.

“Following Michigan in spending was Pennsylvania, where judicial candidates spent $5.4 million and no outside money was involved, and Ohio, where candidates and outside groups spent a combined $4.4 million.  

“Alabama, Illinois, Texas, Arkansas, Wisconsin, Louisiana and Iowa rounded out the top 10.  

“The most visible state races may have been in Iowa, where spending hit $1.4 million, 10th highest nationally. Groups opposed to gay marriage spent an estimated $1 million campaigning to get three Iowa justices removed after they the high court unanimously upheld a lower court ruling that a state ban on same-sex marriage violated the constitutional rights of equal protection. Three justices lost retention elections, and the groups have vowed to pursue the same campaign against the justices who remain on the court.

“Slightly less than half of the 50 states elect Supreme Court justices, although others hold retention elections for appointed justices. Michigan’s high court candidates are nominated by political parties but run on a nonpartisan part of the ballot.

“The 2010 race in Michigan was pivotal, returning the court to a 4-3 GOP majority just a few months after Democrats took a 4-3 edge when a Democrat was appointed to fill a vacancy.  

“It also was bitterly fought, with TV ads trying to portray GOP Justice Robert Young Jr. as a judge who favored big polluters, especially the company responsible for a major oil spill in the Kalamazoo River. In the campaign’s home stretch, former Justice Elizabeth Weaver — a Republican who had warred with Young while on the court — stepped forward and accused him of using a racial slur during private conferences with other justices in 2006.

“Young, who is black, acknowledged using the word but said he was quoting a disgraced former judge who had lost her job because of it. Republican candidate Mary Beth Kelly, too, was hit with a TV ad accusing her of failing to lock up an illegal immigrant who was subsequently convicted of kidnapping and killing a Detroit-area man. An outside group joined the fray, running an ad that suggested Democratic challenger Denise Langford Morris was ‘soft on crime’ for ‘rappers, lawyers and child pornographers.’

“The Michigan Republican Party spent $4.1 million to $4.8 million on the race, largely on ads promoting Young and Kelly, while the Michigan Democratic Party spent $1.5 million to $2.5 million. The report estimates outside groups spent $1.3 million on the race, with most of that — $800,000 to $1.2 million — spent on TV ads by the Law Enforcement Alliance of America, which ran the anti-Morris ads and has ties to the National Rifle Association.  

“The political parties and outside groups spent more than four times as much money on TV ads as the Michigan candidates themselves, the report said. Yet while the candidates had to disclose who was giving them money, the report says voters were left in the dark over who was donating to the race through political parties or special-interest groups and what they were spending on ads.

“’The fact that Michigan led the nation in undisclosed spending in a state judicial campaign is a distinction of dishonor,’ said Rich Robinson, executive director of the nonpartisan Michigan Campaign Finance Network, which has tried unsuccessfully to strengthen the state’s disclosure laws.”