 |
Monthly Archives:
Friday, July 31st, 2009
Brennan Center for Justice, 7/2/09.
On June 8, 2009, in its decision in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., the United States Supreme Court reaffirmed that an impartial, unbiased tribunal is the sina qua non of due process of law. In Caperton, the Court announced that the constitution requires a judge’s recusal “when the probability of actual bias on the part of the judge or decision-maker is too high to be constitutionally tolerable” — when, that is, there is a “serious, objective risk of actual bias.”
Writing for the majority in Caperton, Justice Anthony Kennedy made clear, however, that states can require recusal even in situations that do not give rise to questions of constitutional significance. Justice Kennedy noted that “States may choose to ‘adopt recusal standards more rigorous than due process requires,’” and on this point, even the dissenting Justices agreed. Caperton’s observation that the “constitutional floor” is distinguished from the “ceiling set ‘by common law, statute, or the professional standards of the bench and bar’” echoed a point made by Justice Kennedy in his concurring opinion in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White. There, he wrote that to mitigate threats to the impartiality of the courts, states “may adopt recusal standards more rigorous than due process requires, and censure judges who violate these standards.”
Various states have accepted the invitation to develop more detailed and rigorous recusal standards in recent months. Here we catalogue those state efforts on recusal, as well as related efforts to reform judicial selection processes. The charts below, last updated on 7/28/2009, include brief summaries of each of the state initiatives, with links to relevant materials and news articles.
2009 Judicial Disqualification Initiatives in the States
2009 Judicial Selection Reform in the States
Go to Original.
Friday, July 31st, 2009
Peter Hardin, Gavel Grab, gavelgrab.org, July 28th, 2009.
BLOG — Massey Energy Co., on the losing end of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Caperton v. Massey decision, is at the heart of a new bid for a West Virginia judge to step down from hearing a case on grounds of an appearance of impropriety.
Circuit Judge Michael Thornsbury of Mingo County, overseeing a major pollution lawsuit against Massey, is accused of failing to disclose a friendship with the company’s chief executive and of appointing a personal business partner as administrator of a medical monitoring fund, according to reports in the Charleston Gazetteand the Associated Press
Kevin Thompson, a lawyer for hundreds of area residents, contended in court papers the situation amounted to “cronyism at its worst.”
Judge Thornsbury told the Charleston Gazette the allegations were unfounded and that he was not friends with Massey CEO Don Blankenship.
West Virginia judicial ethics has been getting attention around the nation. The high court was asked in Caperton whether a judge could be forced to step aside from cases involving major financial backers. In its landmark decision last month, the high court said that West Virginia Chief Justice Brent Benjamin was constitutionally obligated to recuse, because Blankenship had spent $3 million to help elect him while appealing a case to overturn a $50 million jury award.
The latest recusal request reflects how ties between Blankenship and jurists continue to spark controversy. State Supreme Court Justice Elliott Maynard lost a primary in May after he was photographed on the French Riviera with Blankenship.
In a related development, Massey has agreed to drop a lawsuit challenging West Virginia’s recusal law as unconstitutional, according to a Charleston Gazette news story.
The close relationships between Don Blankenship and West Virginia Supreme Court justices has been well-chronicled on Gavel Grab.
Peter Hardin, Gavel Grab, gavelgrab.org, July 28th, 2009.
Go to Original.
Friday, July 31st, 2009
The Toledo Blade, Article published July 31, 2009.
TOLEDO — Voters in Toledo and Oregon, which have primary elections Sept. 15, can begin casting absentee ballots in two weeks.
The Lucas County Board of Elections will open its 2009 Early Vote Center, 653 Miami St., where in-person absentee voting will take place. The center will be open from 8:30 a.m. to 7 p.m. Tuesdays and 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Mondays, Wednesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays. It will be closed Sept. 7 for Labor Day, but will be open from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Sept. 12 and from noon to 4 p.m. Sept. 13.
The main office of the board of elections will continue to be open on the third floor of Government Center in downtown Toledo.
Toledo Blade, July 31, 2009.
Friday, July 31st, 2009
Joe Hallett, Dispatch.com, Daily Briefing Blog, Posted on July 30, 2009 2:56 PM.
COLUMBUS — Gov. Ted Strickland will report this afternoon that he has more than $4 million in the bank for his re-election campaign.
Democratic sources said that the required campaign finance report Strickland will file with the secretary of state will show that he has more than $4 million in cash, an amount expected to well exceed fundraising by his Republican rival, John R. Kasich. Statewide and legislative candidates must file reports tomorrow showing how much money they have raised and spent so far in 2009.
Strickland’s campaign began 2009 with $2 million on hand, meaning he has doubled that balance in the past six months.
Go to Original.
Thursday, July 30th, 2009
Published by Kevin, judgesonmerit.org, July 22, 2009 8:12 am.
A little over a month has passed since the Caperton decision, and things still seem to be rotten in the state of West Virginia. Both the Charleston Gazette and the Associated Press (via Forbes.com) are reporting new accusations of judicial impropriety in a case involving Massey Energy, the coal company that was accused in Caperton of buying a WV Supreme Court Justice through campaign donations.
County Judge Michael Thornsbury is presiding over a separate pollution case involving Massey. A motion filed by plaintiff’s attorneys to have Judge Thornsberry removed from the case alleges that seven thousand dollars donated by Massey’s lawyers to the Judge’s election campaign may have bought the company suspect judicial decisions in its favor, including denying the plaintiffs’ motion for a class-action suit, and foisting a settlement offer upon the plaintiffs with very little notice.
The Caperton decision spoke of how the appearance of impropriety could dangerously erode public confidence in the judicial system. These West Virginia cases, which highlight the problem of judges accepting campaign donations from the lawyers and parties before them, undermine the public’s confidence even further.
Published by Kevin, judgesonmerit.org, July 22, 2009 8:12 am.
Go to Original.
|
|
News Feed