Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional law (3)
- Disqualification (3)
- Judges (3)
- Judicial bias (3)
- Judicial ethics (3)
-
- Recusal (3)
- Due process (2)
- Judicial elections (2)
- Appearance of impartiality (1)
- Bias (1)
- Caperton v. Massey (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Court reform (1)
- Courts (1)
- Family courts (1)
- Family law (1)
- Free speech (1)
- Judicial selection (1)
- Judicial selections (1)
- Juries (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Legal ethics (1)
- Minor guardianship (1)
- Politics (1)
- Probate courts (1)
- Professional Responsibility (1)
- Professional conduct (1)
- Self-recusal (1)
- Subconscious bias (1)
- Supreme court (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Seen And Heard: A Defense Of Judicial Speech, Dmitry Bam
Seen And Heard: A Defense Of Judicial Speech, Dmitry Bam
Faculty Publications
Judicial ethics largely prohibits judges from engaging in political activities, including endorsing or opposing candidates for public office. These restrictions on judicial politicking, intended to preserve both the reality and the appearance of judicial integrity, independence, and impartiality, have been in place for decades. Although the Code of Conduct for United States Judges does not apply to the Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justices have long followed the norm that they do not take sides, at least publicly, in partisan political elections. And while elected state judges have some leeway to engage in limited political activities associated with their own candidacy," …
Restoring The Civil Jury In A World Without Trials, Dmitry Bam
Restoring The Civil Jury In A World Without Trials, Dmitry Bam
Faculty Publications
Early in this nation’s history, the civil jury was the most important institutional check on biased and corrupt judges. Recently, concerns about judicial bias, especially in elected state judiciaries, have intensified as new studies demonstrate the extent of that bias. But the jury of Hamilton, Madison, and Jefferson is nowhere to be found. In fact, the civil jury is virtually dead. It is used in less than 1% of all civil cases, and even when it makes a rare appearance, the jury’s powers have been significantly curtailed.
This article argues that we must reimagine the civil jury to match the …
From Orphans To Families In Crisis: Parental Rights Matters In Maine Probate Courts, Deirdre M. Smith
From Orphans To Families In Crisis: Parental Rights Matters In Maine Probate Courts, Deirdre M. Smith
Faculty Publications
This Article examines the sources of the contemporary problems associated with the adjudication of parental rights matters in Maine’s probate courts and identifies specific reforms to address both the structural and substantive law problems. The Article first reviews the development of Maine’s probate courts and their jurisdiction over parental rights matters. It traces the expansion of jurisdiction over children and families from a limited role incidental to the administration of a decedent’s estate to the current scope: a range of matters that may result in the limitation, suspension, or termination of the rights of living parents. Maine probate courts now …
Our Unconstitutional Recusal Procedure, Dmitry Bam
Our Unconstitutional Recusal Procedure, Dmitry Bam
Faculty Publications
In this article, I argue that the recusal procedure used in state and federal courts for nearly all of American history is unconstitutional. For centuries, recusal procedure in the United States has largely resembled that of England before American independence. To this day, in most American courtrooms, the judge hearing the case decides whether recusal is required under the applicable substantive recusal rules. If the judge determines that she can act impartially, or that her impartiality could not reasonably be questioned, the judge remains on the case. And although the judge’s decision is typically subject to appellate review — with …
Recusal Failure, Dmitry Bam
Recusal Failure, Dmitry Bam
Faculty Publications
The American judiciary is suffering from a terrible affliction: biased judges. I am not talking about the subconscious or unconscious biases — stemming from different backgrounds, experiences, ideologies, etc. — that everyone, including judges, harbors. Rather, I am describing invidious, improper biases that lead judges to favor one litigant over another for reasons that almost everyone would agree should play no role in judicial decision-making: the desire to repay a debt of gratitude to those who helped the judge get elected and be reelected.
In this article, I argue that that recusal has failed to prevent biased judges from rendering …
Understanding Caperton: Judicial Disqualification Under The Due Process Clause, Dmitry Bam
Understanding Caperton: Judicial Disqualification Under The Due Process Clause, Dmitry Bam
Faculty Publications
It is virtually impossible to discuss the Supreme Court’s decision in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. without hearing some variant of the following response: “I can’t believe it was as close as it was.” And it does not matter whether you are chatting with your next-door neighbor who had never thought about judicial ethics in his life or discussing the case with a judicial-recusal expert. Nearly everyone seems to agree: Caperton was an “easy” case and that four justices dissented is an indication that there is something terribly wrong. Not only has Caperton elevated the issue of judicial impartiality …