Supporters of judicial campaign financing are citing a recent Supreme Court decision.

In a 5-4 decision in Caperton v. Massey, the high court ruled that a West Virginia Supreme Court justice should not have been involved in a case involving a coal-mining executive who spent more than $3 million to help get him elected.

The justice ruled in favor of his campaign donor, overturning a $50 million jury award.

The N.C. Center for Voter Education, which backed North Carolina's public financing for state Supreme Court and Appeals Court judges, said the case was a prime example of the problems with judges raising large sums of money on their own.

"Whether or not judges are actually biased in favor of a litigant who contributes to a campaign isn't the issue. Of more concern is the appearance that justice is for sale," said executive director Damon Circosta.

The center filed a friend-of-the-court brief in Caperton asking the Supreme Court to find a due process violation.