September 23, 2006
By James C. Turner
At long last our federal courts are strengthening systems that protect the
public and hold judges accountable. State governments need to wake up and
implement similar reforms that will bring much-needed sunshine and
accountability to their courts.
Last week, U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts announced dramatic changes that
tight en conflict of interest rules and promise to end secret lobbying of
federal judg es at posh resorts. The new rules require judges to use
computer software to ide ntify cases where they should disqualify
themselves and mandate prompt reports a bout privately sponsored trips
that will be made publicly available on the Inter net. Americans can now
be sure that the federal judge hearing their case is trul y impartial.
On the same day, a blue-ribbon committee led by Associate Supreme Court
Justice Stephen Breyer highlighted serious problems in the U.S. judicial
accountability system, including an "error rate" of nearly 30 percent in
high-profile cases, cl osed-door procedures, lax time standards and
out-dated Internet sites.
In response, the committee endorsed review of complaints by outside judges
to av oid "home court" bias, improved training, increased public
disclosure and improv ed public Internet resources.
These actions implement judicial accountability reforms that our legal
reform gr oup, HALT, has long sought to address the lack of transparency
and impartiality. As Justice Breyer acknowledged, "we decided to respond
directly to the criticis m, and the criticism turned out to be
constructive."
That's all good news, but most legal problems don't end up in federal
courts. He re are just three recent examples of state accountability
failures.
In Maryland, Judge Richard Palumbo was allowed to quietly retire with
his f ull pension despite complaints that he arbitrarily denied a
protective order to an abused woman who was later doused with gasoline and
suffered burns on 60 perc ent of her body.
In Florida, Judge Richard Albritton received only a one-month
suspension an d small fine after admitting that he solicited lawyers for
gifts, free lunches, hunting trips and parties.
In California, despite a long history of ignoring due process rules,
Judge Pamela Iles has received only private admonishments (four separate
times).
These miscarriages of justice happen because state judicial disability
commissio ns fail Americans in four ways.
Toothlessness: The vast majority of complaints against judges are
ignored o r summarily dismissed, and when there is discipline, it's almost
always a privat e slap on the wrist.
Secrecy: Most state systems operate behind closed doors with no public
acce ss.
Insularity: Non-judges have only token participation, never
constituting mo re than one-third of the hearing commissioners who review
complaints.
Delay: It often takes years to even review complaints.
With this record, is it any surprise that a recent American Bar
Association surv ey found that only 32 percent of Americans have
confidence in our judges?
The only way this will change is through judicial accountability reforms
that ensure openness and impartiality in both state and federal courts.
All of us - judges, lawyers and ordinary citizens - have a shared stake in
seeing that it happens.
James C. Turner is executive director of HALT - An Organization of
Americans for Legal Reform. Suzanne M. Blonder is HALT associate
counsel.
© Traverse City Record-Eagle, 2006
Link to article: http://www.record-eagle.com/2006/sep/23forum.htm
|
