Litigation

JAS, Brennan Laud Ethics Rule, Urge Tweaks

By Peter Hardin

Justice at Stake and a partner, the Brennan Center for Justice, are urging tweaks to a proposed New York judicial ethics proposal while strongly commending it.

The proposed rule to keep campaign cash out of the courtroom “will protect the reality and perception of a fair and impartial judiciary in New York,” wrote Bert Brandenburg, JAS executive director and Adam Skaggs, counsel for the Brennan Center, in a letter to New York Court of Appeals Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman.

“Implementing the rule could not be more important, or more timely,” they wrote. “The public response to the ever-escalating price tags associated with running for judicial office — in New York and other states — has been a perception that sometimes justice is for sale to the highest bidder.”

The rule would ban state judges from hearing cases involving litigants and lawyers who have contributed $2,500 or more to a judge’s election. The state Administrative Board of the Courts has given initial approval of the rule, and public comments have been solicited.

According to a press release, the groups recommended an additional rule to address independent expenditures in judicial elections, noting that the proposed rule applies only to direct candidate contributes.

The letter also proposed adjusting the ethics rule to prevent any “judge shopping” that could occur if parties to a case attempt to game the system, by making a campaign contribution in order to disqualify a particular judge.

To learn more about the proposed rule, check out Gavel Grab. To learn more about recusal, visit Justice at Stake’s issues page on the topic.

Full post as published by The Gavel on March 16, 2011 (boomark / email).