There was a time when the ABA’s Ethics Committee seemed to neglect judicial ethics issues. It went twenty-five years without issuing an opinion on judicial ethics. Recent iterations of the Committee, however, have seemed to be more sensitive to judicial ethics issues: all four judicial ethics opinions have been published within the last eight years.
The newest opinion concludes: “A state supreme court judge may sign a letter printed on the judge’s stationery that is duplicated and mailed by the unified state bar association directed to all lawyers licensed in the state encouraging those lawyers to meet their professional responsibility
Continue Reading A New and Rare ABA Opinion on Judicial Ethics
Keith Swisher
Keith Swisher Blogs
Blog Authors
Latest from Keith Swisher
New Scholarship: Strong on Judicial Education
Professor Strong (Missouri) just posted an interesting critique of judicial education in the United States. Prof. Strong’s article is part of, and summarizes several other articles from, a great symposium on judicial education held last fall at the University of Missouri School of Law: Judicial Education and the Art of Judging: From Myth to Methodology. Prof. Strong’s abstract follows:
Judges control virtually every aspect of judicial education in this country. While such behavior has traditionally been justified as the best if not only means to ensure judicial independence, it is not clear that self-regulation is either necessary or appropriate…
Continue Reading New Scholarship: Strong on Judicial Education
New Contributor: Professor Bam on Williams-Yulee and Its Significance
Judicial ethics scholar Dmitry Bam (Maine) has authored insightful works on judicial elections, disqualification, and Caperton. He has graciously contributed this post, thoughtfully discussing both the significance and the insignificance of the Supreme Court’s Williams-Yulee opinion:
Imagine you are a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case. You are suing a prominent (and wealthy) local doctor and a local hospital. One of two potential judges will be assigned to hear your case. Both judges received campaign contributions from the doctor and from defense counsel. In addition, a pro-hospital/pro-doctor lobbying group had spent a significant amount of money to support both…
Continue Reading New Contributor: Professor Bam on Williams-Yulee and Its Significance
The Latest Edition of the Judicial Conduct Reporter
Cindy Gray and the Center for Judicial Ethics have kindly posted a recent edition of the Judicial Conduct Reporter. Click here to view the edition (Winter 2015). It is an informative read, including a summary of the 104 instances of public judicial discipline in 2014, a list of top judicial ethics stories in 2014, and a flyer for the 24th National College on Judicial Conduct and Ethics (which will be held in Chicago on October 28-30, 2015).
Continue Reading The Latest Edition of the Judicial Conduct Reporter
Williams-Yulee: The Blockbuster Judicial Ethics Case of the Year?
When the Florida Bar bans lawyers or judges from personal solicitations, the Supreme Court will, in a five-to-four decision, uphold the ban against the resulting First Amendment challenge. Or so the Florida Bar now reasonably believes, having twice won in this fashion. Twenty years ago, the Bar first won in Florida Bar v. Went For It, Inc. (concluding that the “Florida Bar’s 30-day restriction on targeted direct mail solicitation of accident victims and their relatives withstands [First Amendment] scrutiny”). The second and (for our purposes) much more relevant case is now Williams-Yulee. The Supreme Court of the United States has…
Continue Reading Williams-Yulee: The Blockbuster Judicial Ethics Case of the Year?
New Scholarship: Federal Rules Revisions and Judicial Bias Claims
Two new pieces directly or indirectly addressing judicial ethics are now available:
(1) Professor Arthur Hellman (Pittsburgh) has posted here his detailed comments on the proposed revisions to the federal rules for handling judicial conduct complaints. His abstract follows:
In 2008, the Judicial Conference of the United States – the administrative policy-making body of the federal judiciary – approved a revised set of rules for handling complaints of misconduct or disability on the part of federal judges. Moving away from the decentralizing approach of the pre-2008 Illustrative Rules, the new rules were made binding on all of the federal…
Continue Reading New Scholarship: Federal Rules Revisions and Judicial Bias Claims
Texas Judge Disciplined for Facebooking About a Trial Over Which She Presided
This week, the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly admonished Galveston Judge Michelle Slaughter for posting about the criminal trial then-pending before her. In the so-called “boy in a box case,” Judge Slaughter admonished the jurors not to post on Facebook (or other social media) about the case and then proceeded the next day to post about the status of the case and demonstrative evidence on her own Facebook account. She also posted a link to this news article about the case. (Of note, a member of the public posted the following comment in response to Judge Slaughter’s…
Continue Reading Texas Judge Disciplined for Facebooking About a Trial Over Which She Presided
In Memoriam: The Passing of Monroe Freedman and the Dimming of Legal Ethics
With nothing but sadness, I must report that Professor, Dean Emeritus, and now Judicial Ethics Forum Emeritus Monroe Freedman passed away today. In addition to the inherent sadness, anything reported about Monroe — a founder of modern legal ethics — will be an understatement. Fortunately, of the many tributes to Monroe over his storied career, two particularly fitting and detailed tributes have already been published: see Ralph Temple’s 1988 piece here; and a Hofstra Law Review Symposium dedicated to Monroe’s work here (including works from Alan Dershowitz, Steve Gillers, Tom Morgan, Deborah Rhode, Roy Simon, among others). Monroe…
Continue Reading In Memoriam: The Passing of Monroe Freedman and the Dimming of Legal Ethics
More Roy Moore and the Ethics of Refusing Same-Sex Marriages
Unbelievably, Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore is still in the news — “unbelievably” because this is the same Chief Justice Moore whose colleagues had to remove from the Alabama Supreme Court for his failure to comply with a direct federal court order to remove his Ten Commandments monument from the public courthouse. As his colleague-justices later concluded, Moore’s actions back in 2001 to 2003 clearly violated the Code of Judicial Conduct, which requires (among other relevant conduct) that judges comply with the law. Moore was nevertheless reelected and has since instructed probate judges not to issue marriage licenses for …
Continue Reading More Roy Moore and the Ethics of Refusing Same-Sex Marriages
Roundtable: Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar
Vanderbilt Law Review’s online forum (called En Banc) just published a fascinating list of short essays on the Supreme Court’s upcoming Williams-Yulee opinion (which will address to what extent the First Amendment shields elective judges who solicit campaign contributions personally):
The Absent Amicus: “With Friends Like These . . .”PDF · Robert M. O’Neil · 68 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 1 (2015).
Public Interest Lawyering & Judicial Politics: Four Cases Worth a Second Look in Williams-Yulee v. The Florida BarPDF · Ruthann Robson · 68 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 15 (2015).
Much Ado About Nothing: …
Continue Reading Roundtable: Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar