Litigation

Caperton v. Massey: a Media Review

By Lissette Villarruel

?Is justice for sale??

This question has echoed through recent years as judicial elections have become increasingly nasty and expensive. It has reached a crescendo in recent weeks, as reporters, columnists and editorial writers have reviewed the case of Caperton v. Massey.

An overwhelming verdict has emerged. Like the public at large, according to recent polls, the media has focused strongly on the question of whether a judge can be impartial when one side has spent heavily in his or her election.

Case in point: Caperton v. Massey. The West Virginia case involves a $50 million fraud lawsuit against A.T. Massey Coal in favor of a rival company owned by Hugh Caperton. While the case was on appeal, Massey CEO Don Blankenship spent $3 million to help elect then-lawyer Brent Benjamin to the state supreme court.

Here is a quick back on some of the more notable articles and commentaries:

USA Today led the movement with an extensive, front-page article which provided a detailed summary of the case and a perceptive overview of the issues at hand. While exploring the arguments for and against reforming recusal standards, the article also noted that the legitimacy of the judicial system was at stake in the eyes of the public:

The notion of impartial judges is central to the U.S. legal system, and the West Virginia case ? to be heard by the high court March 3 ? has become Exhibit A in the debate over how high-dollar state judicial elections can raise questions about the fairness of some rulings.

An article in The Washington Post, which provides an in-depth examination of the litigants and the history of Caperton, also emphasized the extensive reach of the case, declaring that ?the implications go far beyond West Virginia, energizing critics of the multimillion-dollar political campaigns that are now the norm in many of the 39 states that elect judges, where no-holds-barred television advertising has replaced the staid and polite debates of the past.?

Considering these complications, the U.S. Supreme Court faces the difficult challenge of examining and possibly reforming the current recusal standards for judges across the nation, according to a perceptive article in The National Law Journal. As the highest court has never dared set firm standards upon judges, the nine justices must carefully (more…)

Full post as published by The Gavel on March 06, 2009 (boomark / email).