Judicial Discretion: When Judges Bend The Law

The integrity of the judiciary system is dependent on the public's trust and confidence in judges to make fair and impartial decisions. While judges are expected to act independently, they must also comply with the law and a Code of Conduct. This code includes ethical canons that guide federal judges in their official duties and outside activities. Judges are held to legal and ethical standards and are expected to refrain from conduct that may be considered harmful, such as violations of law, court rules, or other specific provisions of the Code of Conduct. Judicial misconduct can come in various forms, including behaviour outside the courtroom that calls into question a judge's integrity, such as criminal law violations or sexual misconduct. Implementing measures to protect the public from judicial misconduct is essential, but it must be done without infringing on the independence of judicial decision-making.

Judicial conduct and integrity

The Code of Conduct for United States Judges includes ethical canons that guide federal judges in the performance of their official duties and various outside activities. The Code of Conduct is essential to maintaining public confidence in the judiciary and the government's system of law.

Judges must be accountable to legal and ethical standards, and their behaviour must be reviewed to ensure integrity and prevent judicial misconduct. This review must be performed without invading the independence of judicial decision-making, a fine line to tread. The judiciary is unique in that it is built on public faith more than any other branch of government. Therefore, citizens must believe that their judges are fair and impartial, and the rulings come from competent, lawful, and independent judicial officers.

Judicial misconduct can take many forms, including violations of criminal law, sexual misconduct, joining discriminatory organizations, using the judicial position to enhance a private interest, and failure to execute judicial duties. Behaviour outside of the courtroom can also constitute misconduct if it calls the judge's integrity into question. For example, judges should neither engage in nor tolerate workplace harassment, abusive behaviour, or retaliation for reporting such conduct.

To maintain their integrity, judges must also devote adequate time to their judicial duties, be punctual in attending court, and take reasonable measures to ensure the cooperation of court personnel, litigants, and their lawyers. Additionally, judges must be mindful of their public comments about pending or impending matters, especially those involving cases from their own court, to avoid denigrating public confidence in the judiciary's integrity and impartiality.

Accountability to legal and ethical standards

Judges are responsible for making rulings on the law, and their conduct must be held to legal and ethical standards. The Code of Conduct for United States Judges includes ethical canons that guide federal judges in performing their official duties and engaging in outside activities. This code of conduct ensures that judges act with integrity and independence, maintaining public confidence in the judiciary's impartiality.

Judicial conduct review is essential to hold judges accountable for their behaviour, both inside and outside the courtroom. While personal aspects of a judge's life should not be regulated, certain behaviours, such as violations of criminal law, sexual misconduct, or joining discriminatory organisations, can call their judicial integrity into question. Therefore, judges must preserve the integrity of the judiciary and avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

Judicial misconduct can take various forms, including improper demeanour, failure to disqualify when there is a conflict of interest, engaging in ex parte communication, and neglecting judicial duties. For example, incidents where people are jailed without due process or judges invent improper remedies for cases can be considered judicial misconduct. Such misconduct erodes public trust and confidence in the judiciary, which is necessary for a functional judicial system.

To maintain public confidence in the judiciary, judges must comply with the law, court rules, and specific provisions of the Code of Conduct. They should devote adequate time to their judicial duties, be punctual, and ensure cooperation from court personnel, litigants, and lawyers. Additionally, judges should refrain from public comment on pending or impending matters to avoid denigrating the public's confidence in the judiciary's integrity and impartiality.

In summary, accountability to legal and ethical standards is crucial for judges to maintain their independence and integrity. Judicial conduct reviews, adherence to the Code of Conduct, and prompt disposition of court business are all part of ensuring that judges act without fear or favour, inspiring trust in the rulings they make on the law.

Independence of judges

An independent judiciary is crucial for upholding the rule of law and protecting human rights in a democratic society. The independence of judges is a fundamental principle that ensures the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

The Code of Conduct for United States Judges outlines the ethical canons that federal judges must adhere to when performing their official duties and engaging in outside activities. This code helps maintain public confidence in the judiciary's integrity and independence, which is essential for the proper functioning of the justice system. Judges must accept that they will be under constant public scrutiny and must willingly accept restrictions that an ordinary citizen might find burdensome. This includes restrictions on their conduct, such as refraining from engaging in or tolerating workplace harassment, abusive behaviour, or retaliation. Judges are also expected to devote adequate time to their judicial duties, be punctual, and ensure that court personnel, litigants, and lawyers cooperate to expeditiously determine matters.

While judges should be independent, they must also comply with the law and the Code of Conduct. This means that they cannot act with fear or favour and must follow the law and court rules, even when making independent judicial decisions. Violations of the law or specific provisions of the Code, such as testifying as a character witness, can diminish public confidence in the judiciary and harm the system of government under law.

The Norwegian Association of Judges published a book on judicial independence, which includes 22 essays on various aspects of the principle. This book and others like it promote reflection and debate on universal issues related to judicial independence, which is an important topic for anyone interested in democracy and the rule of law.

Judicial appointees and personnel

A judge's appointees and personnel include assigned counsel, officials such as referees, commissioners, special masters, receivers, guardians, and personnel such as law clerks, secretaries, and judicial assistants. A judge must ensure that their appointees and personnel cooperate with them to ensure the prompt disposition of the court's business. This includes being punctual in attending court and expeditious in determining matters under submission.

Judges must also be mindful of the potential for their appointees and personnel to engage in workplace conduct that is reasonably interpreted as harassment, abusive behavior, or retaliation for reporting such conduct. This includes harassment that constitutes discrimination on impermissible grounds and other abusive, oppressive, or inappropriate conduct directed at judicial employees or others. Judges have a duty to refrain from retaliation and to ensure that their appointees and personnel do not retaliate against former or current judiciary personnel.

In addition, a judge should discourage a party from requiring them to testify as a character witness, as this injects the prestige of the judicial office into the proceeding and may be perceived as an official testimonial. However, there may be unusual circumstances when the demands of justice require a judge to testify, and they should not use this as a privilege to avoid testifying in response to an official summons.

While a judge's conduct outside of the courtroom is generally not regulated, they can commit misconduct by engaging in personal behavior that calls their judicial integrity into question. This includes violations of criminal law, sexual misconduct with staff/attorneys/parties, joining discriminatory organizations, and using their judicial position to enhance a private interest. Therefore, judges must be mindful of how their behavior, both inside and outside the courtroom, can impact public confidence in the integrity and independence of the judiciary.

Public scrutiny and confidence

Judges are constantly under the public eye and are scrutinised for their conduct both inside and outside the courtroom. The Code of Conduct for United States Judges includes ethical canons that guide federal judges in their performance of official duties and various outside activities. The Code of Conduct prohibits judges from engaging in or tolerating workplace harassment, abusive behaviour, or retaliation for reporting such conduct. Judges are also discouraged from acting as character witnesses, unless unusual circumstances demand it.

Public confidence in the judiciary is of utmost importance. The judiciary is built on public faith and the belief that rulings are made by competent, lawful, and independent judicial officers. Judicial misconduct, in any form, can deplete public confidence. This includes violations of criminal law, sexual misconduct, joining discriminatory organisations, and using the judicial position to enhance private interests.

To maintain public confidence, it is essential that judges act without fear or favour and comply with the law and the Code of Conduct. Violation of the Code diminishes public confidence and harms the system of government under law. Judges must be accountable to legal and ethical standards, and their conduct must be reviewed to ensure integrity and independence.

While it is important to hold judges accountable, the independence of their decision-making must be respected. Judicial conduct review is a challenging task as it must balance accountability with maintaining the independence of the judiciary. Incidents that may require review include jailing individuals without due process, inventing improper remedies, or a breakdown in the rule of law. Implementing a system to protect the public from judicial misconduct is crucial, but it must be done without risking unlawful intervention in unpopular but correct rulings.

Frequently asked questions