ABSTRACT
The conclusion summarizes the argument and puts forward the issues raised by the analysis as presented in the empirical chapters. The reader is asked to consider how the findings presented change our understanding of judicial behavior generally and how methods of retention in the states particularly have a substantial impact on the ability of judges to properly represent both the law and the public. We emphasize how judicial writing is impacted by levels of insulation, and how this may impact the ability of the court to act as a legal and political institution in the states. We likewise briefly sketch out how future research should consider the role of opinions and opinion writing more markedly, as well as how our findings fit with the broader literature in judicial behavior and political communications.
