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

"Nevada's judicial oversight system reaches out to the public with impressive online resources," stated HALT Senior Counsel Suzanne M. Blonder. HALT noted that the Web site of Nevada's Commission on Judicial Discipline clearly explains the judicial disciplinary process, is easy to navigate and provides a downloadable complaint form, a section addressing complainants' most frequently asked questions, a list of upcoming hearings and past disciplinary rulings.

But HALT criticized the state's discipline system for often failing to send a strong enough message to even the most wayward judges. Las Vegas Judge Jeffrey Sobel collected donations of $1,000 to $5,000 each from 39 attorneys and law firms while their cases were pending in his courtroom. He told one lawyer that "he was f---ed because he hadn't contributed while others had," according to records from the Commission on Judicial Discipline. Ultimately the Commission barred him from serving on the bench but allowed him to continue to mediate and arbitrate cases, which already comprised the majority of his practice, and allowed him to serve as a special master who investigates claims in lawsuits and makes recommendations to judges.

HALT also gave demerits to Nevada for the state's "gag" rule, which bars individuals from speaking publicly about their complaints against judges until the Commission on Judicial Discipline explicitly authorizes disclosure. "By prohibiting consumers from discussing a complaint they have filed against a member of the judiciary, Nevada 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.

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. "Nevada's program may have flaws, but in significant areas, it provides a model for the rest of the nation."