How to Enable Denial of Service Attacks on Courts

Following Vernon Valentine Palmer's evidence that judges were more likely to rule for parties that had contributed to their election, X-Judge H. Lee Sarokin endorses a mandatory recusal policy for elected judges: “Judges should recuse themselves in cases in which either a lawyer or litigant has contributed to their election.”

Sounds great, right? So if I'm a corporate lawyer (or union lawyer) and think Judge Y leans too far towards unions (or against, as the case may be), all I have to do is make a token contribution to that judge and voila! I've stacked the bench.

The disease is likely real, but this cure is worse than the disease.

This entry was posted in Law: Ethics. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to How to Enable Denial of Service Attacks on Courts

  1. Aaron says:

    This policy of recusal would prove hard in some places, especially in Miami; some firms in Miami give to all judges.

  2. Donald A. Coffin says:

    Someone, I forget who, has proposed a “blind trust” variant of campaign contributions. You make a contribution to the intermediary, which makes the contribution. The recipient never knows who actually contributed to the campaign. (Did I read this here, Michael?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.