In 2302 we finished our section on the judiciary by looking at judicial elections and the ongoing question whether large contributions to judicial elections - especially those with cases in the courts - distort the justice system and make it more likely that judges make decisions favorable to those interests rather than in the disinterest manner which is supposed to be a hallmark of the judiciary.
Here's an NYT story about such influence:
An examination of the Ohio Supreme Court by The New York Times found that its justices routinely sat on cases after receiving campaign contributions from the parties involved or from groups that filed supporting briefs. On average, they voted in favor of contributors 70 percent of the time.