Washington, DC— Today, the nation's first comprehensive study of the systems that hold state and federal judges accountable ranked Arkansas 20th in the nation and issued the state's program a C-Minus grade. To shine a light on the typically secretive and toothless systems that often fail to remove abusive and incompetent judges from the bench, legal consumer watchdog group HALT, Inc. released its 2008 Judicial Accountability Report Card, analyzing programs in all 50 states, D.C. and the federal circuits.

"Arkansas' system of judicial oversight does not give ordinary citizens a meaningful role in the process for disciplining members of the judiciary who abuse their power," stated HALT Senior Counsel Suzanne M. Blonder.

HALT's study found that laypersons are outnumbered by judges and lawyers on the Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission by a two-to-one ratio. And unlike most states, Arkansas "gags" citizens from disclosing information about their ethics complaints against judges. "By prohibiting consumers from discussing a complaint they have filed against a member of the judiciary, Arkansas rules infringe upon citizens' First Amendment rights and prevent the public from learning when a judge has abused his power on the bench," stated Blonder.

Additionally, Arkansas state law does not place meaningful limitations on the reimbursement and compensation that judges may accept in connection with privately funded trips. "Arkansas' laws unfortunately include massive loopholes that still allow members of the judiciary to be wined and dined on the corporate dime," noted Blonder.

HALT found that Arkansas' judicial oversight system is not entirely flawed, however. Officials at the Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission release information about a judge's misconduct much sooner than administrators in most states. Any action by the Commission, such as dismissal of a complaint or the filing of formal charges against a judge, becomes public information. HALT also noted that Arkansas' Commission hosts a user-friendly, easily navigated Web site that includes a clear explanation of the judicial discipline process, a downloadable complaint form and past rulings against judges.

None of the top five states-Washington, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Arizona and California-scored higher than a B average on the Report Card. More than half of the states received grades in the C range and HALT issued D's to 14 jurisdictions. Two states-Maine and Mississippi-flunked outright.

"At a time when the American public has lost faith in the impartiality and fairness of the nation's judiciary, it's critical that we have an effective system of oversight for judges," stated Blonder. "We hope that Arkansas' chief judicial officers will work to transform a mechanism marred by secrecy into a system dedicated to upholding the integrity of the judiciary."