WAS THAT WRONG? SPONTANEITY'S ROLE IN JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE ALLEGATIONS
The public's confidence in the judicial system is generally determined by the integrity of those entrusted to preside over disputes. Judicial integrity in all 50 states and the District of Columbia is ensured, in part, by various codes of judicial conduct that set required standards for judicial officer behavior occurring inside and outside the courtroom. Judges who engage in improper behavior are subject to investigation, prosecution, and sanction. This work reviews 52 judicial discipline articles involving 66 allegations of judicial misconduct, as reported by the American Bar Association -in the ABA Journal from March 1, 2019 through December 31, 2021. The review includes inappropriate judicial conduct in the courtroom, other professional settings, public, home or a judge's formal written opinion. Based on this review, judicial discipline allegations were found to be most common for spontaneous behavior on the bench, in the courthouse, at home, or in the public, rather than misconduct found in formal written opinions. This review also finds behaviors resulting in judicial conduct allegations occurred at a similar frequency in a professional setting (not in the courtroom or in public) as in the courtroom. Based on these findings, spontaneous comments and actions result in judicial misconduct allegations significantly more often than calculated remarks and reactions. Advisory practices that decrease spontaneity and increase deliberate process will reduce instances of judicial misconduct, improve judicial integrity, and safeguard public confidence in the judicial system.
Code of Conduct, Discipline, Judge, Judicial, Misconduct
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations