Washington, DC— Today, the nation's first comprehensive study of the systems that hold state and federal judges accountable ranked Indiana 7th in the nation and issued the state's program a C+ 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.

"Indiana's consumer-friendly policies and successful public outreach make it one of the nation's most promising systems for holding judges accountable," stated HALT Senior Counsel Suzanne M. Blonder.

An exemplary state in some respects, Indiana does not prohibit individuals from speaking publicly about their ethics complaints against judges. "While many jurisdictions forbid complainants from disclosing a judge's misconduct, Indiana allows its citizens to speak freely about their grievances against members of the judiciary," explained Blonder.

HALT also praised the Web site of Indiana's Judicial Qualifications Commission, noting that it clearly explains the judicial disciplinary process, is easy to navigate, provides a downloadable complaint form and includes past disciplinary rulings.

However, HALT gave demerits to the state for failing to place meaningful limitations on the reimbursement and compensation that judges may accept in connection with privately funded trips. "Indiana's laws unfortunately include massive loopholes that still allow members of the judiciary to be wined and dined on the corporate dime," noted Blonder.

Additionally, the Judicial Qualifications Commission relies primarily on private sanctions, typically disciplining dishonorable judges with closed- door admonitions and cautionary letters. In one recent case, an Indiana judge who was the subject of two investigations about inappropriate courtroom demeanor was simply advised against repeating his actions-but the judge's name was not publicly disclosed and the judge was permitted to continue serving on the bench without discipline.

None of the top five states-Washington, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Arizona and California-scored higher than a B average on HALT's 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. "Indiana's program may have flaws, but in significant areas, it provides a model for the rest of the nation."