Washington, DC— Today, the nation's first comprehensive study of the systems that hold state and federal judges accountable ranked New Hampshire 13th 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.

"By barring consumers from discussing a complaint they have filed against a member of the judiciary, New Hampshire rules infringe upon citizens' First Amendment rights and prevent the public from learning when a judge has abused his power on the bench," stated HALT Senior Counsel Suzanne M. Blonder.

Blonder pointed to New Hampshire's "gag" rule which prohibits citizens from mentioning the fact that they have even filed a complaint against a judge until the state's Committee on Judicial Conduct files formal charges or the complaint has been informally resolved or dismissed.

Additionally, while the Web site for the Committee on Judicial Conduct is easy to navigate, it fails to provide a detailed explanation of the disciplinary process, a database of past rulings against judges and a section addressing consumers' most frequently asked questions.

New Hampshire rules do not place meaningful limitations on the reimbursements and compensation that judges may accept in connection with privately funded trips. "New Hampshire's laws unfortunately include massive loopholes that still allow members of the judiciary to be wined and dined on the corporate dime," noted Blonder.

However, HALT's study found that New Hampshire is one of the few states where ordinary citizens outnumber judges and lawyers on the panel that decides ethics complaints against judges. Three judges, one court clerk, an attorney and six laypersons serve on the state's Committee on Judicial Conduct.

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 New Hampshire's chief judicial officers will work to transform a mechanism marred by secrecy into a system dedicated to upholding the integrity of the judiciary."