Litigation

More Caperton Media

By Charlie Hall

Leading off new articles on Caperton v. Massey is a very interesting Q&A of former Texas Chief Justice Tom Phillips, conducted by Tony Mauro, Supreme Court reporter for the Washington Legal Times.

Phillips predicts that the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling Monday, which said that a West Virginia justice should have removed himself from a case involving a litigant who spent $3 million to help elect him, will not cause a flood of recusal motion. But he says he hopes it leads states to rethink the use of competitive elections to choose judges, calling it a “19th-century” method. For full article, click here.

In the Washington Post, a June 10 editorial called “Bias on the Bench” praises the Supreme Court’s ruling, and says states should do more to insulate courts from political influence, by considering tougher recusal rules and possibly ending the practice of competitive elections for judges. For full article, click here.

The Wall Street Journal’s Nathan Koppel cites Justice at Stake spending data in an article on state-level attempts to eliminate special interest influence from the courts. For full article, click here. Not surprisingly, a Wall Street Journal editorial deplores the Supreme Court’s decision.

And Eric Velasco of the Birmingham News, who has done an excellent job over the years covering high-cost Supreme Court elections in Alabama, quotes Justice at Stake and the Brennan Center for Justice in assessing how Monday’s ruling might affect judicial politics in that state. For full article, click here.

Full post as published by The Gavel on June 11, 2009 (boomark / email).