Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Judicial disqualification (3)
- ABA Model Judicial Code (2)
- Appearance of impropriety (2)
- Constitutional Law (2)
- Judicial ethics (2)
-
- Professional Responsibility (2)
- ABA (1)
- Appearance of Impropriety (1)
- Appearance of impartiality (1)
- Campaign Contributions (1)
- Campaign Expenditures (1)
- Campaign Finance (1)
- Caperson and citizens united (1)
- Chief Justice John Roberts (1)
- Constitutionalizing (1)
- Costs of disqualification (1)
- Disqualification (1)
- Due Process (1)
- Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (1)
- Impartiality (1)
- Inspector general (1)
- Judicial Elections (1)
- Judicial Ethics (1)
- Judicial discipline (1)
- Judicial elections (1)
- Laxalt v. McClatchy (1)
- Legal Ethics (1)
- Legal ethics (1)
- Matter of Larsen (1)
- Mistretta v. United States (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Constitutionalizing Judicial Ethics: Judicial Elections After Republican Party Of Minnesota V. White, Caperton And Citizens United, Ronald Rotunda
Constitutionalizing Judicial Ethics: Judicial Elections After Republican Party Of Minnesota V. White, Caperton And Citizens United, Ronald Rotunda
Ronald D. Rotunda
No abstract provided.
Judicial Disqualification In The Aftermath Of Caperton V. A.T. Massey Coal Co., Ronald D. Rotunda
Judicial Disqualification In The Aftermath Of Caperton V. A.T. Massey Coal Co., Ronald D. Rotunda
Ronald D. Rotunda
Does Due Process require a judge to disqualify himself if an individual spent independent funds to buy ads that criticized the judge's opponent in a judicial election? The Supreme Court said yes (5 to 4) in the Caperton decision, and thus has created more uncertainty in the law. Does it matter if the person who paid for the independent ads was not a lawyer or a party but was only an employee of the party? And, does it matter if that employee's financial interest in the law suit (if one were to pierce the corporate veil) is minor – substantially …
Judicial Transparency, Judicial Ethics, And A Judicial Solution: An Inspector General For The Courts, Ronald Rotunda
Judicial Transparency, Judicial Ethics, And A Judicial Solution: An Inspector General For The Courts, Ronald Rotunda
Ronald D. Rotunda
Many federal judges routinely fear criticism, but that fear is unwarranted. The public is rightly concerned that the procedure to investigate and discipline problem-judges is flawed, particularly in a few high-profile cases discussed in this article. Several recent indictments of federal judges add to the problem. As Judge Ralph Winter has acknowledged, the status quo is "not a confidence builder". Judges should welcome an Inspector General for the Federal Courts, who could restore public confidence in the federal judicial discipline system. The Inspector General can investigate potential ethical violations and proceed in those few instances where more is needed. This …
The Propriety Of A Judge's Failure To Recuse When Being Considered For Another Position, Ronald Rotunda
The Propriety Of A Judge's Failure To Recuse When Being Considered For Another Position, Ronald Rotunda
Ronald D. Rotunda
Some commentators have argued that Judge John Roberts, recently confirmed as Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, violated a federal statute because of his failure to recuse himself in the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which a panel of the D.C. Circuit including Roberts recently decided. Several Senators raised the issue of Judge Roberts' failure to recuse himself during the course of his confirmation hearings, but the Judge did not comment on it because the case was still pending.
Any proposed "jobs recusal" rule, which would require a judge to recuse himself in such circumstances, imposes costs that …
Judicial Ethics, The Appearance Of Impropriety, And The Proposed New Aba Judicial Code, Ronald D. Rotunda
Judicial Ethics, The Appearance Of Impropriety, And The Proposed New Aba Judicial Code, Ronald D. Rotunda
Ronald D. Rotunda
We sometimes think, loosely, that ethics is good and that therefore more is better than less. But more is not better than less, if the more exacts higher costs, measured in terms of vague rules that impose unnecessary and excessive burdens. Overly-vague ethics rules impose costs on the judicial system and the litigants, which we should weigh when determining whether to impose ill-defined and indefinite ethics prohibitions on judges. Unnecessarily imprecise ethics rules allow and tempt critics, with minimum effort, to levy a plausible and serious charge that the judge has violated the ethics rules. Overuse not only invites abuse …