There are three basic kinds of judicial disciplinary commissions. In the one-tier system that 35 States have adopted, the investigation of complaints and recommendations to the State supreme court are delegated to one body. This type of commission is most susceptible to charges of providing insufficient due-process safeguards. Eight States have some form of the multitier system, which is designed to separate procedures for screening and investigating from recommending functions. Four States use a commission-legislature system, which vests the commission with the responsibility for recommending discipline short of removal to the highest court of the State, while the removal power remains with the legislature. Based upon the expectation that the attitudes and perceptions of the commissioners will influence the commissions' performance in processing complaints, a questionnaire was mailed to all executive secretaries and commission members in the continental United States that have judicial-conduct organizations inquiring about the role of their commission. A 35 percent response rate was obtained. Commissioners were also asked to make decisions about 14 hypothetical complaints. Although there were some differences among the groups, there was an overall similarity of views held by judges, lawyers, and laypersons. Recommended disciplinary actions were also similar among the three types of commissioners. Overall, the State experience suggests that maintaining judicial independence must be balanced with an effective method of processing complaints. This may be accomplished by having a permanent staff composed of judicial or quasi-judicial personnel handle the first few stages of complaint processing instead of an active judge on an ad hoc basis. Five notes and 13 references are provided.