skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 64183 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE AND REMOVAL IN THE UNITED STATES
Author(s): R R WHEELER; A L LEVIN
Corporate Author: Federal Judicial Ctr
United States of America
Date Published: 1979
Page Count: 80
Sponsoring Agency: Federal Judicial Ctr
Washington, DC 20002
National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
Sale Source: Federal Judicial Ctr
Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building
One Columbus Circle, NE
Washington, DC 20002
United States of America

National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America
Document: PDF
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: AN OVERVIEW OF THE ORIGINS OF JUDICIAL DECISION MECHANISMS FOCUSES ON THE CURRENTLY POPULAR COMMISSIONS AND EVALUATES JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE MECHANISMS ACCORDING TO THEIR EFFECTIVENESS AND FAIRNESS.
Abstract: THE INTEREST IN NEW FORMS OF JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE AND REMOVAL SUSTAINED IN THE U.S. OVER THE LAST TWO DECADES HAS SPURRED THE ESTABLISHMENT IN ALMOST ALL THE STATES OF JUDICIAL BRANCH COMMISSIONS. THESE COMMISSIONS ARE COMPOSED OF JUDGES, LAWYERS, AND NONLAWYERS WITH THE AUTHORITY TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGED JUDICIAL UNFITNESS AND TO PURSUE A RANGE OF SANCTIONS FOR DEALING WITH IT. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS ALSO BEEN PRESSURED TO INSTITUTE SUCH A COMMISSION TO DEAL WITH ALLEGED FEDERAL JUDGE UNFITNESS. CONTRIBUTING TO THESE DEVELOPMENTS IS THE FACT THAT JUDICIAL SYSTEMS ARE NOW PERCEIVED AS COMPLEX AND INTERDEPENDENT INSTITUTIONS IN NEED OF SOME OVERSEEING. JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY HAS BEEN CENTRALIZED, REFLECTING THE VIEW THAT THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM SHOULD NOT BE LEFT TO EITHER INDIVIDUAL JUDGES OR COURTS. FURTHERMORE, WIDESPREAD POPULAR OPINION HAS GAINED MOMENTUM IN DEMANDING JUDICIAL DISCIPLINARY MECHANISMS. FOUR NORMATIVE PRINCIPLES HAVE BEEN DISCOVERED THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED WHEN JURISDICTIONS CONSIDER ENSURING QUALITY OF THEIR JUDICIARY. FIRST, THE IMPORTANCE AND THE LIMITS OF THE OBLIGATION TO PRESERVE JUDICIAL INDEPENCES MUST BE RECOGNIZED. SECOND, THE BEST QUALITIES OF INFORMAL METHODS MUST BE RETAINED FOR DEALING WITH PROBLEM JUDGES. THIRD, ASSURANCE THAT THE SYSTEM WILL INDEED RESPOND TO LEGITIMATE COMPLAINTS MUST BE PROVIDED. FINALLY, ANY SYSTEM MUST CONFORM TO THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE JURISDICTION IN QUESTION. THE FACT THAT A PARTICULAR MECHANISM FOR JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE HAS PROVEN SUCCESSFUL IN ONE OR MORE STATES DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT SHOULD BE ADOPTED IN THE FEDERAL SYSTEM, OR OTHER STATES, WITHOUT CAREFUL SCRUTINY. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED--MHP)
Index Term(s): Attorney judge evaluation; Federal courts; Federal regulations; Judge censure and removal; Judicial conduct and ethics; State Judicial Conduct Commissions
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=64183

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.