Litigation

Tough Recusal Rule Urged in NY State

By Peter Hardin

The Fund for Modern Courts, a New York State court reform group, has issued a report urging a new automatic disqualification rule for judges, in order to help ensure fair and impartial courts.

The group is a partner of Justice at Stake. Victor A. Kovner, the group’s chair, discussed the recommendation for a tough recusal rule in a New York Daily News commentary, headlined “Make justice blind again for New York’s judiciary:”

“Modern Courts believes that requiring judges to recuse themselves when parties before them have made significant campaign contributions will avoid abuses and strengthen public confidence in the administration of justice.”

Recusal?the decision by a judge to exit a case to avoid potential ethical conflict?has been at the center of a national legal debate, especially since last June, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Caperton v. Massey that large campaign expenditures could create an unacceptable potential for bias.

The report by Modern Courts recommends adoption of a rule requiring judges to disqualify themselves from hearing cases in which any party made contributions to the judge’s campaign adding up to $1,000 or more.

“We believe that such an automatic disqualification rule would address legitimate public concern about the influence of campaign contributions on judges,” Kovner said in a press release, “even if they do not rise to the level of the extraordinary situation in” Caperton.

The report was written in response to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, Kovner said, because that January ruling  has made it clear “that judicial election campaigns may be inundated with excessive amounts of corporate and union spending.”

J. Adam Skaggs of the Brennan Center for Justice, another partner of Justice at Stake, commended the Modern Courts report and said, “With unprecedented levels of money pouring into judicial elections across the country, strong disqualification rules are needed to ensure that judges step aside when their financial supporters appear before them.”

In Caperton, a coal company executive had spent $3 million to help a West Virginia Supreme Court justice win election. Modern Courts co-signed an amicus brief submitted by Justice at Stake in the case. To learn more about Caperton, click here for earlier Gavel Grab posts, and to read more about recusal, click here for related Gavel Grab stories.

Full post as published by The Gavel on April 23, 2010 (boomark / email).