Law Commons^™

Mirror, Mirror, On The Wall—Biased Impartiality, Appearances, And The Need For Recusal Reform, Zygmont A. Pines

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The article focuses on a troubling aspect of contemporary judicial morality.

Impartiality—and the appearance of impartiality—are the foundation of judicial decision-making, judicial morality, and the public’s trust in the rule of law. Recusal, in which a jurist voluntarily removes himself or herself from participating in a case, is a process that attempts to preserve and promote the substance and the appearance of judicial impartiality. Nevertheless, the traditional common law recusal process, prevalent in many of our state court systems, manifestly subverts basic legal and ethical norms.

Today’s recusal practice—whether rooted in unintentional hypocrisy, wishful thinking, or a pathological cognitive dissonance— …

Hart Failure: The Supreme Judicial Court's Interpretation Of Nonjudicial Demeanor, Harold T. Kelly Jr.

Maine Law Review

Among the inherent powers of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court is the power to regulate the officers of its courts. As the court explained in Board of Overseers of the Bar v. Lee, “each of the three co-equal branches of government has, without any express grant, the inherent right to accomplish all objects necessarily within the orbit of that department when not expressly allocated to, or limited by the existence of a similar power in, one of the other departments.” It is not surprising that the Supreme Judicial Court has for many years regulated, through formal disciplinary proceedings, the conduct …

Hart Failure: The Supreme Judicial Court's Interpretation Of Nonjudicial Demeanor, Harold T. Kelly Jr.

Maine Law Review

Among the inherent powers of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court is the power to regulate the officers of its courts. As the court explained in Board of Overseers of the Bar v. Lee, “each of the three co-equal branches of government has, without any express grant, the inherent right to accomplish all objects necessarily within the orbit of that department when not expressly allocated to, or limited by the existence of a similar power in, one of the other departments.” It is not surprising that the Supreme Judicial Court has for many years regulated, through formal disciplinary proceedings, the conduct …

Judicial Ethics: A New Paradigm For A New Era, Charles G. Geyh

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

As the preamble to the Model Code of Judicial Conduct indicates, traditional notions of judicial ethics operate within a rule of law paradigm, which posits that the “three I’s” of judicial ethics—independence, impartiality, and integrity—enable judges to uphold the law. In recent decades, however, social science, public opinion, and political commentary suggest that appointed judges abuse their independence by disregarding the law and issuing rulings in accord with their biases and other extralegal impulses, while elected judges disregard the law and issue rulings popular with voters, all of which calls the future of the three I’s and judicial ethics itself …

To Friend Or To Unfriend?: It's Time To Update The Status On What It Means To Be Facebook Friends, Carolina A. Del Campo

St. Thomas Law Review

This comment analyzes what a Facebook friendship encompasses in the legal profession and focuses on what courts, specifically Florida, recognize this relationship to mean. Part II provides an overview of the process for judicial disqualification and reviews the opinions released by the Florida Judicial Ethics Committee regarding judicial participation on social media." Part III discusses how traditional friendships have been considered in regards to judicial disqualification and compares what other states have understood a Facebook friendship to encompass versus what Florida has concluded. Lastly, Part IV proposes a new Judicial Ethics Opinion that reflects a more modernized understanding of the …

The Right To An Independent Judiciary And The Avoidance Of Constitutional Conflict: The Burger Court’S Flawed Reasoning In Chandler V. Judicial Council Of The Tenth Circuit And Its Unfortunate Legacy, Joshua E. Kastenberg

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

In 1970, the United States Supreme Court issued Chandler v. Judicial Council of the Tenth Circuit in which five Justices determined that the federal courts of appeals possessed an administrative authority to manage the district court judges within an appellate court’s respective circuit. The decision enabled the Tenth Circuit to decide the fitness of a judge to preside over cases without a formal motion from a litigant. Although Congress had enabled the courts of appeals to oversee basic judicial functions (such as temporarily assigning district court judges to overworked districts), Congress did not intend to grant the power to remove …

Religiously Devout Judges: A Decision-Making Framework For Judicial Disqualification, Michelle L. Jones

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Education For Judicial Aspirants, Keith R. Fisher

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

Introductory judicial education (IJE) is an avenue for improving both appointive and elective systems of judicial selection. The impetus for considering this topic can be traced back to lingering unease with judicial selection and the ongoing (though now somewhat stagnant) debate over merit selection. Moreover, changes in the nature of law practice and the judicial role over the past several decades have rendered the gap between those two activities increasingly large. Moreover, surveys of minority communities have consistently demonstrated a far lower degree of confidence in the impartiality and fairness of our nation’s judges. IJE is an effort to maximize …

Conflict Of Interest And Disqualification In The Federal Courts: Suggestions For Reform, Arthur D. Hellman

Testimony

Although federal judges do not run for election, over the last three decades the process of nomination and confirmation has become politicized to a disturbing degree. There is a real danger that the judges will come to be perceived not as dispassionate servants of the law but as political actors who pursue political or ideological agendas. One consequence of these developments is likely to be increased scrutiny of judges’ responses to motions to recuse. Here as in other aspects of the operations of the judiciary, “just trust us” is no longer sufficient.

Two provisions of Title 28 of the United …

Highlighting A Low Point On A High Court: Some Thoughts On The Removal Of Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Rolf Larsen And The Limits Of Judicial Self-Regulation, Charles G. Geyh

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Judicial Control Over The Bar Versus Legislative Regulation Of Governmental Ethics: The Pennsylvania Approach And A Proposed Alternative, Stephen J. Shapiro

Duquesne Law Review

Pennsylvania courts, led by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, recently have declared two sections of the Pennsylvania Ethics Act unconstitutional as applied to judges and attorneys. Citing the exclusive power of the supreme court to regulate the practice of law in Pennsylvania, the courts have struck down the Act's postemployment restriction and financial disclosure requirement. The author critically examines the Pennsylvania decisions in this area and concludes that the courts' reasoning is contrary to settled principles of separation of powers. He suggests an alternative approach for determining the constitutionality of ethics legislation that regulates the conduct of the judiciary and …