Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Litigation Blogs -> CalBizLit

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Litigation

: CalBizLit

California Judges: Recusal For Campaign Contributions?

By Bruce Nye

ADVERTISEMENTS

As lots of people know, oral argument is set before the US Supremes next week in Caperton, et al. v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., et al. As the SCOTUS docket summary puts it:

The question presented is whether Justice Benjamin's failure to recuse himself from participation in his principal financial supporter's case violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The New York Times presents the long version of the case here.

California has contested judicial elections for trial court judges, who run for six year terms. Appellate and Supreme Court Justices stand for a yes or no vote every twelve years. As the San Francisco Chronicle's SFGate reported this morning, a quasi-official task force recently proposed a rule requiring judges to disqualify themselves from any case involving a party who has contributed $1,500 or more to their campaigns. That proposal now heads to the Judicial Commission. If CalBizLit's crystal ball is functioning properly, the proposal will thereafter never be heard from again. One of many members of the judiciary expressed opposition:

"You're going to have panel-fixing like crazy," said Judith McConnell, an appellate justice in San Diego, predicting that wily and well-heeled litigants would rig their three-member panels by sprinkling $1,500 contributions among jurists they didn't like.

Full post as published by CalBizLit on February 24, 2009 (boomark / email).