Judges Commons^™

To Write Or Not To Write: The Ethics Of Judicial Writings And Publishing, Nick Badgerow, Michael Hoeflich, Sarah Schmitz

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

Judges are bound by the Model Code of Judicial Conduct promulgated by the American Bar Association and adopted most states, including the federal judiciary. Within these rules governing judicial conduct, Judges owe duties to the public and to their calling, to be (and appear to be) objective, fair, judicious, and independent. When judges venture into the realm of extrajudicial writing—in the form of fiction novels, short stories, legal books, children’s books, and the like—they must consider the ethical bounds of that expression. The Model Code of Judicial Conduct imposes five main constraints upon extrajudicial writings: (a) a judge may not …

Why The Dobbs Draft Release Makes It Tougher To Teach Legal Ethics, Lynne Marie Kohm

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

No abstract provided.

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 …

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 Texas Standards For Appellate Conduct: An Annotated Guide And Commentary, Gina M. Benavides, Joshua J. Caldwell

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

The legal profession is bound by ethical rules that govern and guide our conduct and actions as lawyers. One of the under-appreciated, but profoundly important set of guidelines is the Texas Standards for Appellate Conduct. These Standards serve as an excellent practice guide for appellate practitioners and appellate courts and as a model code of conduct for the Bar as a whole.

The goal of this Article is to dissect the Texas Standards for Appellate Conduct and provide useful commentaries for the readers to better appreciate and understand each element of the Standards. The commentaries provide direct case examples and …

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 …

Reforming Recusal Rules: Reassessing The Presumption Of Judicial Impartiality In Light Of The Realities Of Judging And Changing The Substance Of Disqualification Standards To Eliminate Cognitive Errors, Melinda A. Marbes

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

In recent years, high profile disqualification disputes have caught the attention of the public. In each instance there has been an outcry when a presiding jurist was asked to recuse but declined. Unfortunately, even if the jurist explains his refusal to recuse, the reasons given often are unsatisfying and do little to quell suspicions of bias. Instead, litigants, the press, and the public question whether the jurist actually is unbiased and doubt the impartiality of the judiciary as a whole. This negative reaction to refusals to recuse is caused, at least in part, by politically charged circumstances that cause further …

Electronic Social Media: Friend Or Foe For Judges, M. Sue Kurita

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

The use of electronic social communication has grown at a phenomenal rate. Facebook, the most popular social networking website, has over 1,968,000,000 users—a number that has exponentially grown since its inception in 2004. The number of judges accessing and using electronic social media (ESM) has also increased. However, unlike the general population, judges must consider constitutional, ethical, technical, and evidentiary implications when they use and access ESM. The First Amendment forbids “abridging the freedom of speech” and protects the expression of personal ideas, positions, and views. However, the American Bar Association’s Model Code of Judicial Conduct and the Texas Code …

Responding To Judicial And Lawyer Misconduct: Analyzing A Survey Of State Trial Court Judges, Peter M. Koelling

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

While reported cases or incidents may give us insight into the interpretation of Rule 2.15 of the Model Code of Judicial Conduct, they do not give us a sense of how often judges undertake the obligation to act under the rule. The Judicial Division of the American Bar Association developed a survey to explore the interpretation and the implementation of Rule 2.15 of the Model Code of Judicial Conduct, and to determine how and in what manner state trial court judges responded to ethical violations by lawyers and other judges. The survey looked back over a ten-year period and was …