Law Commons^™

Judicial Ethics And Identity, Charles Gardner Geyh

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This Article seeks to untangle a cluster of controversies and conundrums at the epicenter of the judiciary’s role in American government, where a judge’s identity as a person and role as a judge intersect. Part I synthesizes the traditional ethics schema, which proceeds from the premise that good judges decide cases on the basis of facts and law, unsullied by the extralegal influences of identity that make judges who they are as human beings. Part II discusses the empirical evidence, and the extent to which identity influences judicial decision- making in ways that contradict tenets of the traditional schema. Part …

Judged By The (Digital) Company You Keep: Maintaining Judicial Ethics In An Age Of Likes, Shares, And Follows, John Browning

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

Just like lawyers, judicial use of social media can present ethical pitfalls. And while most scholarly attention has focused on either active social media conduct by judges (such as posting or tweeting) or on social media “friendships” between judges and others, this Article analyses the ethical dimensions of seemingly benign judicial conduct on social media platforms, such as following a third party or “liking,” sharing, or retweeting the online posts of others. Using real-world examples, this Article analyses how even such ostensibly benign conduct can create the appearance of impropriety and undermine public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of …

Countering Gerrymandered Courts, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

The key insight in Professor Miriam Seifter's outstanding article Countermajoritarian Legislatures is that state legislatures are usually antidemocratic due to partisan gerrymandering, whereas state governors and judiciaries are insulated from gerrymandering by statewide elections (or selection), and thus they should have a more prominent role in framing election law and in enforcing the separation of powers.

This Piece offers afriendly amendment: These observations are true, so long as states do not gerrymander their state supreme courts into antidemocratic districts. The problem is that historically, judicial elections emerged generally as districted elections, and often with regional and partisan politics shaping those …

Judicial Ethics In The Confluence Of National Security And Political Ideology: William Howard Taft And The “Teapot Dome” Oil Scandal As A Case Study For The Post-Trump Era, Joshua E. Kastenberg

St. Mary's Law Journal

Political scandal arose from almost the outset of President Warren G. Harding’s administration. The scandal included corruption in the Veterans’ Administration, in the Alien Property Custodian, but most importantly, in the executive branch’s oversight of the Navy’s ability to supply fuel to itself. The scandal reached the Court in three appeals arising from the transfer of naval petroleum management from the Department of the Navy to the Department of the Interior. Two of the appeals arose from President Coolidge’s decision to rescind oil leases to two companies that had funneled monies to the Secretary of the Interior. A third appeal …

America's Lawyerless Courts: Legal Scholars Work To Recommend Large-Scale Changes In Lawyerless Civil Courts, Anna E. Carpenter, Colleen F. Shanahan, Jessica K. Steinberg, Alyx Mark

Faculty Scholarship

At approximately 9:00 on most weekday mornings, thousands of state civil courts open their doors and begin hearing cases. These cases involve hundreds of thousands of people acrossthe country. State civil courts are the core of America's civil justice system, whether measured by a raw number of cases or courts'impact on ordinary people's lives. These courts handle 98% of all civil matters filed each year – around 20 million cases.

Many people are pulled into civil court because they cannot pay their rent or debts. Many more come to court for help with intimate and family relationships, including those seeking …

Presidential Commission On The Supreme Court Of The United States Final Report, Michelle Adams, Kate Andrias, Jack Balkin, William Baude, Bob Bauer, Elise Boddie, Guy-Uriel E. Charles, Andrew Manuel Crespo, Walter Dellinger, Justin Driver, Richard Fallon Jr., Caroline Fredrickson, Heather Gerken, Nancy Gertner, Thomas B. Griffith, Tara Leigh Grove, Bert I. Huang, Sherrilyn Ifill, Olatunde C.A. Johnson, Michael S. Kang, Alison L. Lacroix, Margaret H. Lemos, David F. Levi, Trevor W. Morrison, Richard H. Pildes, Michael D. Ramsey, Cristina M. Rodríguez, Kermit Roosevelt, Bertrall Ross, David A. Strauss, Laurence H. Tribe, Michael Waldman, Adam White, Keith E. Whittington

Faculty Scholarship

On April 9, 2021, President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. issued Executive Order 14023 establishing this Commission, to consist of “individuals having experience with and knowledge of the Federal judiciary and the Supreme Court of the United States.” The Order charged the Commission with producing a report for the President that addresses three sets of questions. First, the Report should include “[a]n account of the contemporary commentary and debate about the role and operation of the Supreme Court in our constitutional system and about the functioning of the constitutional process by which the President nominates and, by and with the advice …

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— …

Judicial Disclosure And The Judicial Mystique, Michel Paradis

Hofstra Law Review

Judges in the American legal system are expected to be neutral. To this end, judges are required to recuse themselves whenever their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Yet, this requirement is by and large designed to be self-policed. This self-policing structure is a deviation from the ordinary presumptions of adversarial litigation, not the least because it depends upon the presumption that judges are disinterested about whether they are improperly interested. To compensate for this, a robust body of common law has developed that requires judges to disclose facts about themselves that might affect their neutrality, even if they do not …

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 …

Avoiding Judicial Discipline, Veronica Root Martinez

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past several years, several high-profile complaints have been levied against Article III judges alleging improper conduct. Many of these complaints, however, were dismissed without investigation after the judge in question removed themselves from the jurisdiction of the circuit’s judicial council—oftentimes through retirement and once through elevation to the Supreme Court. When judges—the literal arbiters of justice within American society—are able to elude oversight of their own potential misconduct, it puts the legitimacy of the judiciary and the rule of law in jeopardy.

This Essay argues that it is imperative that mechanisms are adopted that will ensure investigations into …

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 …

The Judge's Relative Is Affiliated With Counsel Of Record: The Ethical Dilemma, Leslie W. Abramson

Leslie W. Abramson

This Article examines various aspects of the ethical dilemmas judges face when assigned to preside over a case in which a relative is affiliated with counsel or record. It discusses relevant federal and state ethical standards including the appearance of partiality, the relative-lawyer's interest, and the disclosure of the relationship by judge and waiver. It then addresses the application of the standards in case law and other situations through the relative-lawyer's law firm position either as a partner, non-partner, or public attorney. The last part proposes supplemental Code or Commentary language for consideration by state and federal courts and legislatures.

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 …

Punishment Without Process: Victim Impact Proceedings For Dead Defendants, Bruce Green, Rebecca Roiphe

Articles & Chapters

After Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide in jail, two judges allowed his accusers to speak in court. This article argues that the proceedings were inappropriate because the criminal case ends when the defendant dies. If the conviction and appeal are not final, there is no finding of guilt, and the defendant is still presumed innocent. Allowing accusers to speak at this time violates the principle of due process and threatens to undermine faith in judges and the criminal justice system in general. While courts are at times legally required to hear from victims of crimes, they were not allowed to do …

Neil Gorsuch And The Ginsburg Rules, Lori A. Ringhand, Paul M. Collins Jr.

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Supreme Court nominees testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee frequently invoke the so-called “Ginsburg Rule” to justify not answering questions posed to them. According to this “rule,” nominees during their testimony must avoid signaling their preferences about previously decided Supreme Court cases or constitutional issues. Using empirical data on every question asked and answered at every hearing from 1939–2017, we explore this “rule,” and its attribution to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. We demonstrate three things. First, the Ginsburg Rule is poorly named, given that the practice of claiming a privilege to not respond to certain types of questions predates 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 …

Chief Justice William Howard Taft's Conception Of Judicial Integrity: The Legal History Of Tumey V. Ohio, Joshua Kastenberg

Cleveland State Law Review

In 1927, Chief Justice William Howard Taft led a unanimous Court to determine that, at minimum, the right to an impartial and independent judiciary meant that the judge had to lack a personal interest in the outcome of the trial. While the decision, Tumey v. Ohio, was based on a judge’s pecuniary interest, it was also part of Taft’s efforts to ensure that the nation’s judges, from the municipal courts to the Supreme Court had the public’s confidence in their integrity. Tumey, therefore, is not simply a decision on pecuniary interests. It can, and should, be applied to …

Morality, Law, And Judicial Ethics In The Western Legal Tradition, Mortimer N.S. Sellers

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

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," …

Amicus Brief In Terrance Williams V Pennsylvania, Lawrence J. Fox

Amicus Briefs

No abstract provided.

Deferred Action, Supervised Enforcement Discretion, And The Rule Of Law Basis For Executive Action On Immigration, Anil Kalhan

Anil Kalhan

In November 2014, the Obama administration announced the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) initiative, which built upon a program instituted two years earlier, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative. As mechanisms to channel the government’s scarce resources toward its enforcement priorities more efficiently and effectively, both DACA and DAPA permit certain individuals falling outside those priorities to seek “deferred action,” which provides its recipients with time-limited, nonbinding, and revocable notification that officials have exercised prosecutorial discretion to deprioritize their removal. While deferred action thereby facilitates a highly tenuous form of quasi-legal recognition …

Coming Off The Bench: Legal And Policy Implications Of Proposals To Allow Retired Justices To Sit By Designation On The Supreme Court, Lisa Mcelroy, Michael Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

In the fall of 2010, Senator Patrick Leahy introduced a bill that would have overridden a New Deal-era federal statute forbidding retired Justices from serving by designation on the Supreme Court of the United States. The Leahy bill would have authorized the Court to recall willing retired Justices to substitute for recused Justices. This Article uses the Leahy bill as a springboard for considering a number of important constitutional and policy questions, including whether the possibility of 4-4 splits justifies the substitution of a retired Justice for an active one; whether permitting retired Justices to substitute for recused Justices would …

Impartiality In Judicial Ethics: A Jurisprudential Analysis, W. Bradley Wendel

W. Bradley Wendel

No abstract provided.

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 …

The Great Charter, Vincent R. Johnson

Faculty Articles

A look at the history and legacy of the Magna Carta elucidates the many ways in which it shaped American jurisprudence and the law of Texas. The Magna Carta is held in high regard because the unknown drafters understood the importance of legal principles, fair procedures, proportional punishment, official accountability, and respect for human dignity. Its unquestionable commitment to the primacy of legal principles and anticipation of the development of judicial ethics significantly influenced and contributed to the construction and content of the Texas Constitution, Bill of Rights, and many Texas cities’ ethics codes. Although it was intensely focused on …

Trusting Trust, Deborah Gordon

Deborah S Gordon

What is a trustee and how should we understand her duties? The existing literature typically identifies the trustee in the role of agent, partner or contracting party. This Article re-envisions the trustee in the role of the legal system’s most trusted type of decision-maker: the common law judge. Rather than argue for a top-down recreation of the trustee’s role, this Article contends that valuable lessons can be learned by reconceptualizing how trustees, settlors, and beneficiaries view themselves and each other. Using traditional literature about great judging as a touchstone, the Article argues that those qualities essential to principled adjudication — …

Bringing A World Of Light To Technology And Judicial Ethics, David Hricik

Articles

The Luddites thought that by smashing machines in early 19th Century England, they could eliminate the threat that those machines presented to them. Of course, they were wrong. As was the case during the Luddites’ time, technology continues to march inexorably onward in today’s society. As a result, those within the legal community—judges in particular—have no choice but to begin using technology. Although judges are currently using technology, they sometimes do so without understanding what they are doing.

Already, today’s “new-fangled” contraptions have ensnared judges. Perhaps the most widely known example is Judge Kozinski of the United States Court of …

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

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Early Disclosure Would Gut Judicial Complaint System, Susan Rutberg, Peter Keane

Publications

No abstract provided.