Voters' responses to elite malpractice, such as corruption, vary depending on partisanship and politicians’ demographic traits. While partisan loyalty often shields in-party elites from sanctions, nonpartisan contexts might shift voter biases, amplifying the influence of demographic characteristics like gender and ethnicity. This paper investigates whether nonpartisan settings improve accountability by reducing partisan bias or whether they heighten demographic biases, thereby trading one form of bias for another. Empirically, I conduct two survey experiments. The first, in Austria, uses a 2x2 design to examine how minister gender and partisanship influence voter sanctions in corruption scandals. The second, in France, Germany, Sweden, and Romania, employs a factorial experiment to evaluate how gender, ethnicity, and other traits shape voter sanctions in partisan and nonpartisan contexts. I find that voters sanction corruption scandals more severely in nonpartisan contexts, leading to more uniform accountability. While I do not find consistent evidence that women face a double standard, ethnic minority politicians consistently face harsher sanctions, particularly when evaluated as members of the out-party. These findings have significant implications for democratic representation. First, the heightened sanctions against ethnic minorities may deter them from entering politics, perpetuating inequalities in political representation. Second, contrary to the perception that nonpartisan politicians may undermine democratic representation, I demonstrate that partisan contexts pose greater challenges to the quality of democratic accountability than nonpartisan settings.