Despite voters' distaste for corruption, corrupt politicians frequently get reelected. This Element provides a framework for understanding the conditions under which corrupt politicians are reelected. One unexplored source of electoral accountability is court rulings on candidate malfeasance, which are increasingly determining politicians' prospects. I find that (1) low-income voters - in contrast to higher income voters - are responsive to such rulings. Unlike earlier studies, we explore multiple tradeoffs voters weigh when confronting a corrupt candidate, including the candidate's party, policy positions, and personal attributes. The results also surprisingly show (2) low-income.
