INHERENT POWER IS ESSENTIAL TO THE EXISTENCE, DIGNITY, AND OPERATION OF A COURT, PARTICULARLY THE HIGHEST COURTS OF STATES. SUCH POWER IS IMPLIEDLY GIVEN WHEN A COURT IS CREATED. THE POWER IS IMPLIED BECAUSE IT IS INDISPENSABLE IF A COURT IS TO PERFORM THE DUTIES SPECIFICALLY ASSIGNED TO IT. IT IS CONTENDED THAT A STATE'S HIGHEST COURT, AS THE COURT MOST CONCERNED WITH THE OPERATION OF A STATE'S JUDICIAL SYSTEM, HAS THE INHERENT POWER TO SUPERVISE THE CONDUCT OF JUDGES, BOTH ON AND OFF THE BENCH, WHEN SUCH CONDUCT AFFECTS THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. THIS INHERENT POWER HAS ITS SOURCE IN COMMON LAW, IN THE SEPARATION OF POWERS OF THE THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT, IN THE SUPERVISORY POWER OF A STATE'S HIGHEST COURT, IN THE POWER OF THE COURT TO PROMULGATE STANDARDS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS OR CONDUCT, AND IN THE POWER OF THE COURT OVER THE CONDUCT OF MEMBERS OF THE BAR. FAILURE TO EXERCISE THE INHERENT POWER OF A STATE'S HIGHEST COURT, PARTICULARLY IN THE FIELD OF JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE, INVITES LEGISLATIVE ENFORCEMENT. THIS IS A GREATER THREAT TO THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY THAN THE EXERCISE OF SELF-DISCIPLINE BY THE JUDICIAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT. PROPOSED STANDARDS TO SERVE AS A CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDGES ARE DISCUSSED. CASE LAW IS REVIEWED. (DEP)