Alabama judicial system ranks 38th with D+ grade

June 17, 2008

WASHINGTON - A Washington-based court watchdog group has ranked Alabama's judicial system 38th in the nation and issued the state's program a D+.

HALT (Help Abolish Legal Tyranny) released its 2008 Judicial Accountability report card Monday, analyzing programs in all 50 states, Washington, D.C. and the federal circuits. "Alabama's system of judicial oversight gives too many judges a free pass," HALT senior counsel Suzanne M. Blonde said in a press release.

To illustrate her point, she referred to the case of Birmingham Municipal Judge David Barnes, who refused to recuse himself from an animal cruelty case against City Council President Lee Loder, even though Loder was a former fraternity brother.

Barnes dismissed all charges against Loder without a hearing and criticized the suggestion that he might have been biased for his conduct. Barnes was merely issued a slap on the wrist "public censure and a short paid suspension" despite violating important judicial ethics rules, Blonder said.

The study also found that officials at the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission are prohibited from releasing information about an ethics complaint against a judge until the commission files formal charges.

Additionally, the Web site for the commission fails to provide a clear explanation of the judicial discipline process and lacks numerous critical resources, including a downloadable complaint form, a database of past disciplinary decisions and a link to the procedural rules.

Alabama rules fail to place meaningful limitations on the reimbursement and compensation that judges may accept in connection with corporate- and special-interest-funded trips. "Alabama's laws unfortunately include massive loopholes that still allow members of the judiciary to be wined and dined on the corporate dime," Blonder said.

The state also received failing marks for its financial disclosure rules. Although Alabama judges are required to file annual reports detailing their economic interests, the state Supreme Court seals these records from the public.

"Concealing this critical information prevents litigants from having the opportunity to determine whether the judge presiding over their case has a conflict of interest," said Blonder.

None of the top five states - Washington, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Arizona and California - scored higher than a B. More than half of the states received C's and HALT issued D's to 14 others.

Two states, Maine and Mississippi, flunked outright.

Founded in 1978, HALT is a nonprofit, nonpartisan public interest group with more than 50,000 members.