State judicial elections, 2025

2025 State
Judicial Elections

2026 »

« 2024

Overview
Supreme Courts Overview
Appellate Courts Overview
View judicial elections by state:

Select a state:AlabamaAlaskaArizonaArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareFloridaGeorgiaHawaiiIdahoIllinoisIndianaIowaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMississippiMissouriMontanaNebraskaNevadaNew HampshireNew JerseyNew MexicoNew YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaOhioOklahomaOregonPennsylvaniaRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennesseeTexasUtahVermontVirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsinWyomingSelect court type:Trial courtsAppellate courtsSupreme courtsReset

A total of 15 appellate court seats are up for election in 2025. The seats include:

* 5 supreme court seats
* 10 intermediate appellate court seats

Ballotpedia provides coverage of supreme court and intermediate appellate court elections, as well as local trial court elections for judges within the 100 largest cities in the United States as measured by population.

On this page, you will find:

* Information on the different methods of selecting judges
* Information on the different types of courts
* A list of state intermediate appellate court elections in 2025
* A list of state supreme court elections in 2025
* Information on incumbent win rates among state supreme court justices

## Contents

* 1 Judicial selection methods
* 1.1 Election-based methods
* 1.2 Appointment-based methods
* 2 Types of courts
* 2.1 Limited jurisdiction courts
* 2.2 General jurisdiction courts
* 2.3 Intermediate appellate courts
* 2.4 Courts of last resort
* 3 State supreme court offices up for election in 2025
* 3.1 Targeted races
* 3.1.1 DLCC targets
* 4 State intermediate court offices up for election in 2025
* 5 State supreme court incumbent win rates
* 6 Historical election data
* 6.1 Courts of last resort
* 6.1.1 Retention
* 6.1.2 Non-retention
* 6.2 Intermediate appellate courts
* 6.2.1 Retention
* 6.2.2 Non-retention
* 7 Noteworthy events
* 7.1 Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley announces retirement (April 2024)
* 8 See also
* 9 External links
* 10 Footnotes

## Judicial selection methods[edit]

See also: Judicial selection in the states

Methods of judicial selection vary substantially across the United States.[1] Though each state has a unique set of guidelines governing how they fill their state and local judiciaries, there are five main methods. Two methods are primarily election-based; three methods are primarily appointment-based.

### Election-based methods[edit]

* Partisan elections: Judges are elected by the people, and candidates are listed on the ballot alongside a label designating political party affiliation.
* Nonpartisan elections: Judges are elected by the people, and candidates are listed on the ballot without a label designating party affiliation.

### Appointment-based methods[edit]

* Gubernatorial appointment: Judges are appointed by the governor. In some cases, approval from the legislative body is required.
* Assisted appointment, also known as merit selection or the Missouri Plan: A nominating commission reviews the qualifications of judicial candidates and submits a list of names to the governor, who appoints a judge from the list. After serving an initial term, judges typically run in a yes-no retention election to remain on the court.[2] At the state supreme court level, this selection method is further divided into three types. Click here to learn more.
* Legislative elections: Judges are selected by the state legislature.

States may apply more than one of the five methods across different levels of courts. For example, a state may choose its appellate court judges by assisted appointment while choosing its trial court judges in partisan elections. Some states may even select judges of the same court level differently depending on the population of an area or local opinion.[1][2] States may also modify any of the systems above in their own way. The assisted appointment method, in particular, comes in a variety of forms. For instance, some states require the governor to choose from the commission's list of nominees, while in other states the list is only a suggestion.[1]

## Types of courts[edit]

Depending on your state, judges from several different types of courts may appear on the ballot, each with different jurisdictions. There are four types of courts, listed here in ascending order of jurisdiction:

1. Limited jurisdiction courts
2. General jurisdiction courts
3. Intermediate appellate courts
4. Courts of last resort

### Limited jurisdiction courts[edit]

Limited jurisdiction is a term used to describe courts with legal authority restricted to specific subjects, cases, or persons. Examples of limited jurisdiction courts include family courts, traffic courts, probate courts, and military courts.[3] Forty-six states have limited jurisdiction courts. Washington, D.C., and four states (California, Illinois, Iowa, and Minnesota) do not have such courts.[4] Rather, their general jurisdiction courts are assigned cases that might normally have been given to a limited jurisdiction court.

### General jurisdiction courts[edit]

General jurisdiction is a term used to describe courts that do not have limits on the type of cases they can hear. Cases typically originate in general jurisdiction courts, and their decisions can be appealed to intermediate appellate courts. All 50 states and Washington, D.C., have general jurisdiction courts. General jurisdiction courts are sometimes referred to as trial courts or district courts.

### Intermediate appellate courts[edit]

See also: State intermediate appellate court elections, 2025

Intermediate appellate courts, as their name suggests, serve as an intermediate step between the trial courts and the courts of last resort in a state. Their jurisdiction varies from state to state.

Forty-two states have at least one intermediate appellate court. Some states have more than one of these types of courts. For example, Alabama has one intermediate appellate court for civil matters and another for criminal matters. Pennsylvania's superior court and commonwealth court are both appellate courts but have different jurisdictions. Other states, such as Illinois and California, have multiple divisions of intermediate appellate courts with varying degrees of independence from each other. Intermediate appellate courts are sometimes called courts of appeal.

### Courts of last resort[edit]

See also: State supreme court elections, 2025

A state court of last resort is the highest judicial body within a jurisdiction's court system. It is a court with the highest appellate authority, meaning that its rulings are not subject to review by any other court in the state. A court of last resort is often, but not always, referred to as a supreme court.[5]

All 50 states and Washington, D.C., have at least one court of last resort. Oklahoma and Texas both have two courts of last resort, one for civil appeals and one for criminal appeals.

## State supreme court offices up for election in 2025[edit]

See also: State supreme court elections, 2025

### Targeted races[edit]

#### DLCC targets[edit]

The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee announced they would target the following state supreme court races in 2025:[6]

* Pennsylvania
* Wisconsin

## State intermediate court offices up for election in 2025[edit]

See also: State intermediate appellate court elections, 2025

## State supreme court incumbent win rates[edit]

Click the tabs below to view information about incumbent win rates in state supreme court elections over time. In this section, you will find:

* Win rates by year
* Win rates in partisan elections
* Win rates in nonpartisan elections
* Win rates by state

Win rates by year

Win rates in partisan elections

Win rates in nonpartisan elections

Win rates by state

Incumbents tend to do better in elections for any office than newcomers facing incumbents. This is no less true in state supreme court elections. Across all types of state supreme court elections, incumbent justices running for re-election won 93% of the time from 2008-2024. The year when the most incumbents lost was 2024, when eight incumbents did not win re-election. The year with the lowest re-election rate was 2015, when out of two justices, only one (50%) was re-elected. In years where more justices were running, the year with the lowest re-election rate was 2024, when 89% of justices were re-elected..

Incumbent win rates in state supreme court elections (2008-2024) Election year | Total incumbent elections | Incumbent elections won | Incumbent elections lost | Incumbent win rate

|
|
|
|

2024 | 73 | 65 | 8 | 89%
2023 | 0 | — | — | —
2022 | 78 | 75 | 3 | 96%
2021 | 0 | — | — | —
2020 | 70 | 64 | 6 | 91%
2019 | 0 | — | — | —
2018 | 58 | 52 | 6 | 90%
2017 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 100%
2016 | 65 | 62 | 3 | 95%
2015 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 50%
2014 | 71 | 69 | 2 | 97%
2013 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 100%
2012 | 65 | 60 | 5 | 92%
2011 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 100%
2010 | 68 | 63 | 5 | 93%
2009 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 100%
2008 | 63 | 57 | 6 | 90%
TOTAL | 625 | 580 | 45 | 93%

In partisan elections, incumbents running for re-election won 80% of the time from 2008-2024. The number of seats incumbents lost in a single year was 2024, when five incumbents lost.

Incumbent win rates in partisan state supreme court elections (2008-2024) Election year | Total incumbent elections | Incumbent elections won | Incumbent elections lost | Incumbent win rate

|
|
|
|

2024 | 15 | 10 | 5 | 67%
2023 | 0 | — | — | —
2022 | 16 | 13 | 3 | 81%
2021 | 0 | — | — | —
2020 | 14 | 12 | 2 | 86%
2019 | 0 | — | — | —
2018 | 13 | 9 | 4 | 69%
2017 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 100%
2016 | 10 | 9 | 1 | 90%
2015 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0%
2014 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 100%
2013 | 0 | — | — | —
2012 | 11 | 8 | 3 | 72%
2011 | 0 | — | — | —
2010 | 7 | 6 | 1 | 86%
2009 | 0 | — | — | —
2008 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 100%
TOTAL | 101 | 81 | 20 | 80%

In nonpartisan elections, incumbents running for re-election won 91% of the time from 2008 to 2024. The years tied for when the most incumbents lost was 2008, when six incumbents did not win re-election. Michigan had partisan primaries but nonpartisan general elections and so are counted here as holding nonpartisan elections. Additionally, NorthCarolina and Ohio previously held nonpartisan elections and are counted here up until they no longer hold them, which is 2016 and 2020, respectively.

Incumbent win rates in nonpartisan state supreme court elections (2008-2024) Election year | Total incumbent elections | Incumbent elections won | Incumbent elections lost | Incumbent win rate

|
|
|
|

2024 | 27 | 25 | 2 | 93%
2023 | 0 | — | — | —
2022 | 21 | 21 | 0 | 100%
2021 | 0 | — | — | —
2020 | 26 | 23 | 3 | 88%
2019 | 0 | — | — | —
2018 | 22 | 20 | 2 | 91%
2017 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 100%
2016 | 22 | 20 | 2 | 91%
2015 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 100%
2014 | 31 | 29 | 2 | 93%
2013 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 100%
2012 | 24 | 22 | 2 | 92%
2011 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 100%
2010 | 22 | 20 | 2 | 91%
2009 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 100%
2008 | 28 | 22 | 6 | 79%
TOTAL | 228 | 207 | 21 | 91%

Among the 38 states that conduct elections for supreme court justices, 15 have seen incumbents lose elections from 2008-2024. These were Alabama, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. In the other 23 states, incumbent supreme court justices won re-election 100% of the time from 2008 to 2024.

The average win percentage of state supreme court justices was 93%. 13 states fell below this average, while 25 had a higher win rate. Of the 13 states, seven use partisan elections, five use nonpartisan elections, and one uses retention elections.

Incumbent win rates by state in state supreme court elections (2008-2024) State | Total incumbent elections | Incumbent elections won | Incumbent elections lost | Incumbent win rate

|
|
|
|

Alabama | 20 | 17 | 3 | 85%
Alaska | 9 | 9 | 0 | 100%
Arizona | 16 | 16 | 0 | 100%
Arkansas | 9 | 9 | 0 | 100%
California | 12 | 12 | 0 | 100%
Colorado | 17 | 17 | 0 | 100%
Florida | 21 | 21 | 0 | 100%
Georgia | 23 | 23 | 0 | 100%
Idaho | 14 | 14 | 0 | 100%
Illinois | 14 | 12 | 2 | 86%
Indiana | 12 | 12 | 0 | 100%
Iowa | 20 | 17 | 3 | 85%
Kansas | 21 | 21 | 0 | 100%
Kentucky | 11 | 10 | 1 | 91%
Louisiana | 5 | 5 | 0 | 100%
Maryland | 18 | 18 | 0 | 100%
Michigan | 16 | 13 | 3 | 81%
Minnesota | 21 | 21 | 0 | 100%
Mississippi | 20 | 15 | 5 | 75%
Missouri | 13 | 13 | 0 | 100%
Montana | 13 | 13 | 0 | 100%
Nebraska | 19 | 19 | 0 | 100%
Nevada | 16 | 16 | 0 | 100%
New Mexico | 16 | 14 | 2 | 88%
North Carolina | 12 | 6 | 6 | 50%
North Dakota | 9 | 9 | 0 | 100%
Ohio | 21 | 13 | 8 | 62%
Oklahoma | 44 | 43 | 1 | 97%
Oregon | 21 | 21 | 0 | 100%
Pennsylvania | 7 | 6 | 1 | 86%
South Dakota | 9 | 9 | 0 | 100%
Tennessee | 15 | 15 | 0 | 100%
Texas | 50 | 45 | 5 | 90%
Utah | 7 | 7 | 0 | 100%
Washington | 27 | 26 | 1 | 96%
West Virginia | 7 | 5 | 2 | 71%
Wisconsin | 8 | 6 | 2 | 75%
Wyoming | 12 | 12 | 0 | 100%
TOTAL | 625 | 580 | 45 | 93%

## Historical election data[edit]

There were 1,610 state judicial elections held from 2016 to 2024.

State judicial elections, 2016-2024 Year | Court of last resort seats | Intermediate appellate court seats | Total

|
|
|

2024 | 83 | 221 | 304
2023 | 2 | 13 | 15
2022 | 84 | 298 | 384
2021 | 1 | 14 | 15
2020 | 78 | 201 | 279
2019 | 3 | 14 | 17
2018 | 68 | 244 | 312
2017 | 4 | 17 | 21
2016 | 76 | 189 | 265
Total | 399 | 1,211 | 1,610

### Courts of last resort[edit]

#### Retention[edit]

From 2016 to 2024, retention elections took place for 53 judicial seats on courts of last resort. All but two of those judges were retained.

#### Non-retention[edit]

There were 246 non-retention elections held from 2016 to 2024, with 153 races contested (62.2%). Incumbents ran for re-election 74.7% of the time. Of the incumbents who ran for re-election, 87.4% won re-election.

The table below is organized by year and includes the total number of seats up for election, the number of contested seats, the number and percentage of incumbents who sought re-election, the number and percentage of incumbents who faced opposition, and the number and percentage of incumbents who won another term.

Court of last resort elections, 2016-2024 Year | Total seats | Seats contested | Incumbents who
sought re-election | % incumbents who
sought re-election | Incumbents who
faced opposition | % incumbents who
faced opposition | Incumbents who
were re-elected | % incumbents who
were re-elected

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

2024 | 54 | 26 | 42 | 77.8% | 17 | 40.5% | 35 | 83.3%
2023 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0%
2022 | 48 | 30 | 34 | 70.8% | 21 | 61.8% | 32 | 94.1%
2021 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0%
2020 | 49 | 37 | 41 | 83.7% | 29 | 70.7% | 36 | 87.8%
2019 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0%
2018 | 45 | 25 | 34 | 75.6% | 19 | 55.9% | 28 | 82.4%
2017 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 100% | 1 | 50.0% | 2 | 100%
2016 | 42 | 28 | 31 | 73.8% | 17 | 54.8% | 28 | 90.3%
Total | 246 | 153 | 184 | 74.8% | 104 | 56.5% | 161 | 87.5%

### Intermediate appellate courts[edit]

#### Retention[edit]

From 2016 to 2024, retention elections took place for 510 judicial seats on intermediate appellate courts. All were retained.

#### Non-retention[edit]

There were 701 non-retention elections from 2016 to 2024, with 297 races contested (42.4%). Incumbents ran for re-election 81.7% of the time. Of the incumbents who ran for re-election, 84.0% won re-election.

The table below is organized by year and includes the total number of seats up for election, the number of contested seats, the number and percentage of incumbents who sought re-election, the number and percentage of incumbents who faced opposition, and the number and percentage of incumbents who won another term.

Intermediate appellate court elections, 2016-2024 Year | Total seats | Seats contested | Incumbents who
sought re-election | % incumbents who
sought re-election | Incumbents who
faced opposition | % incumbents who
faced opposition | Incumbents who
were re-elected | % incumbents who
were re-elected

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

2024 | 142 | 61 | 116 | 81.7% | 40 | 34.5% | 90 | 77.6%
2023 | 11 | 3 | 7 | 63.6% | 1 | 14.3% | 6 | 85.7%
2022 | 148 | 51 | 114 | 77.0% | 29 | 25.4% | 103 | 90.4%
2021 | 10 | 5 | 5 | 50.0% | 3 | 60.0% | 3 | 60.0%
2020 | 117 | 57 | 93 | 79.5% | 37 | 39.8% | 84 | 90.3%
2019 | 10 | 7 | 5 | 50.0% | 0 | 0.0% | 5 | 100.0%
2018 | 142 | 69 | 112 | 78.9% | 44 | 39.3% | 82 | 73.2%
2017 | 16 | 11 | 6 | 37.5% | 3 | 50.0% | 4 | 66.7%
2016 | 105 | 33 | 85 | 81.0% | 20 | 23.5% | 79 | 92.9%
Total | 701 | 297 | 543 | 77.5% | 177 | 32.6% | 456 | 84.0%

## Noteworthy events[edit]

### Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley announces retirement (April 2024)[edit]

On April 11, 2024, Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley announced she would not seek a fourth 10-year term in  2025. At the time of her announcement, Bradley said, “I know I can do the job and do it well. I know I can win re-election, should I run. But, it's just time to pass the torch, bringing fresh perspectives to the court.”[7] Bradley last ran for re-election in  2015, defeating  Jame Daley 58.1% to 41.9%.

The Washington Post's Patrick Marley wrote that the retirement "sets the stage for an intense race for control of the court two years after candidates, political parties and interest groups spent more than $50 million in the most expensive judicial race in U.S. history."[8]

While Wisconsin Supreme Court elections are officially nonpartisan, justices and candidates are considered to be liberal or conservative. The court’s 15-year conservative majority tightened in three elections preceding Bradley's announcement. The  2019 election resulted in conservatives gaining a 5-2 majority, and the  2020 election resulted in a 4-3 conservative majority. In the  2023 election, Janet Claire Protasiewicz defeated  Daniel Kelly 55.4% to 44.4%, resulting in liberals gaining a 4-3 majority on the court.

Bradley is part of the court’s liberal majority, and her retirement creates an opportunity in the 2025 election for conservatives to regain a 4-3 majority or for liberals to hold their majority. Conservatives will defend seats in 2026 and 2027, meaning if they do not win a majority in 2025, the next opportunity they have to do so would be the 2028 election.

## See also[edit]

* Judicial elections on Ballotpedia

* State supreme court elections, 2020

* State intermediate appellate court elections, 2020

* Local trial court judicial elections, 2020

## External links[edit]

* Search Google News for this topic

## Footnotes[edit]

1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 American Judicature Society, "Methods of Judicial Selection," archived February 2, 2015
2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 American Bar Association, "Judicial Selection: The Process of Choosing Judges," June 2008
3. ↑ US Legal, "Limited Jurisdiction Law & Legal Definition," accessed December 17, 2015
4. ↑ National Center for State Courts, "Limited Jurisdiction Courts—Challenges, Opportunities, and Strategies for Action," accessed September 23, 2015
5. ↑ U.S. Legal, "Court of last resort Definition," accessed August 25, 2013
6. ↑ Bluesky, "The Downballot on February 25, 2025," accessed February 27, 2025
7. ↑ Wisconsin Supreme Court, "Press Release," April 11, 2024
8. ↑ The Washington Post, "Wisconsin Supreme Court liberal won’t run again, shaking up race for control," April 11, 2024

v • e

2025 State Judicial Elections

State supreme court elections by state|

Louisiana • Pennsylvania • Wisconsin

Intermediate appellate court elections by state|

Louisiana • Pennsylvania • Washington • Wisconsin

Ballotpedia

About

Overview • What people are saying • Support Ballotpedia • Contact • Contribute • Job opportunities

* * *

Executive: Leslie Graves, Founder and CEO • Gwen Beattie, Chief Operating Officer

Communications: Alison Graves • Carley Allensworth • Abigail Campbell • Sarah Groat • Nathaniel Harwood • Dillon Redmond • Erica Shumaker
External Relations: Ashley Fleming • Thomas Mardik • Hannah Nelson
Operations: Meghann Olshefski • Amanda Herbert • Mandy Morris • Caroline Presnell • Kelly Rindfleisch
Policy: Jon Dunn • Jimmy McAllister • Annelise Reinwald • Emma Soukup • Mina Vogel
Content Strategy: Josh Altic
Tech: Matt Latourelle • Ryan Burch • Kirsten Corrao • Beth Dellea • Travis Eden • Tate Kamish • Margaret Kearney • Eric Lotto • Joseph Sanchez • Mary Susmitha

Contributors: Scott Rasmussen

* * *

Editorial Content

Geoff Pallay, Director of Editorial Content and Editor-in-Chief • Ken Carbullido, Vice President of Election Product and Technology Strategy • Norm Leahy, Senior Editor • Daniel Anderson, Managing Editor • Ryan Byrne, Managing Editor • Cory Eucalitto, Managing Editor • Mandy McConnell, Managing Editor • Doug Kronaizl, Local Elections Project Manager • Jaclyn Beran • Marielle Bricker • Joseph Brusgard • Emma Burlingame • Kelly Coyle • Thomas Ellis • Frank Festa • Nicole Fisher • Brianna Hosea • Joseph Greaney • Thomas Grobben • Jaime Healy-Plotkin • Tyler King • Glorie Martinez • Nathan Maxwell • Ellie Mikus • Ellen Morrissey • Mackenzie Murphy • Kaley Platek • Samantha Post • Adam Powell • Ethan Rice • Spencer Richardson • Victoria Rose • Briana Ryan • Myj Saintyl • Maddy Salucka • Abbey Smith • Alexis Thacker • Janie Valentine • Joel Williams • Samuel Wonacott • Trenton Woodcox

v • e

Judicial elections by state

Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming