Kirk Randazzo, professor of political science at the University of South Carolina, has been elected as president of the Southern Political Science Association. 

As the third-largest political science association in the U.S., SPSA brings together scholars to share research and discuss the role of political science in academia and society as a whole. 

His leadership of SPSA comes at a time when academics who study politics and government are grappling with unique challenges: challenges to free speech and academic freedom, partisan conflicts and artificial intelligence-driven misinformation. 

“These battles affect our collective understanding of, and appreciation for, science and the production of knowledge or expertise, the communication of those messages and the ability of society to engage in civil discourse,” Randazzo says. 

In addition to being a longtime faculty member at USC, Randazzo is an alumnus. He earned his B.A. in music and M.A. in international studies at USC before earning his Ph.D. at Michigan State. He returned as a faculty member in 2008. 

Randazzo's research career has focused on the courts and judicial politics. His most recent co-authored book, Does Privilege Prevail? (2024), examines how courts function across different countries and finds that they share this in common: Those who spend more time in court and have significant wealth have an advantage. 

“All countries share similar patterns when it comes to court cases,” he says, describing a haves-vs.-have-nots situation. “Those litigants with resources (the ‘haves’) or who repeatedly engage with judges (i.e. ‘repeat players’) have a significant advantage over everyone else.” 

Those with money and experience can extend cases, hire stronger legal teams, and sometimes influence the development of rules that shape future disputes, creating significant obstacles for litigants with fewer resources, Randazzo says. 

“For litigants with limited resources this disadvantage is often overwhelming,” Randazzo says. 

At the same time, his research points to the role of organized interest groups, such as the ACLU or NAACP in the U.S., help to narrow that gap by providing experience and resources to people with fewer resources or less experience in legal contests.