News & Updates

A second justice has withdrawn from considering disciplinary charges against Justice David Prosser, with Justice Annette Ziegler joining Justice Pat Roggensack. Prosser has asked the other four justices to recuse themselves as well.

The commission on judicial qualifications will consider a disciplinary complaint filed against a district court judge for clicking “Like” on a Facebook post by a candidate for sheriff. According to the complaint, this violates the judicial canons of ethics that prevent a judge from “publicly endorsing or opposing another candidate for any public office.”

A hearing is scheduled for August 8 to address whether the three justices standing for retention in November should be removed from the ballot. In June, the Southeastern Legal Foundation filed a suit on behalf of two Florida voters alleging that the justices violated state law by using court employees to assist in filing campaign documents.

A federal judge struck down an aspect of the public financing program for appellate judges that provides rescue funds to judicial candidates who are outspent by privately funded candidates. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a similar provision in Arizona’s public financing program in 2011, on the grounds that it infringed upon freedom of speech.

A district court candidate involved in a Republican runoff has taken the rare step of rejecting the voluntary campaign spending limits enacted by the Judicial Campaign Fairness Act of 1995. The built-in incentive to follow the limits is that, once one candidate refuses to comply, the other candidates in the race are no longer bound.

In a guest post on Justice at Stake's Gavel Grab, Natalie Knowlton (Manager, Quality Judges Initiative) discusses the release of IAALS' Cornerstones of State Judicial Selection: Laying the Foundation for Quality Court Systems and Judges. Cornerstones…

A house committee voted to investigate impeachment proceedings against four judges based on complaints stemming from their rulings in two child custody cases.

Results from two efforts to evaluate judicial candidates in the state have been released recently. The King County Bar Association’s screening committee gave “unqualified” ratings to three of 13 candidates for contested seats on the King County Superior Court.

An error and vague wording on election-related materials could affect the outcome of a supreme court race. In King County, both the judicial primary ballot and the judicial voter pamphlet indicate that the top two vote-getting candidates in a supreme court race will advance to the general election, when in fact, this two-person race will be decided in the primary.

The Nebraska State Bar Association’s 2012 Judicial Performance Evaluation results have been released, showing positive ratings for judges across the state, and the Bar has developed a radio spot to draw attention to this resource for voters. Nebraska uses the “Missouri Plan” for selecting judges and after appointment judges serve an initial term of three years before standing for a retention vote.

The Legal Profession course at Indiana University Maurer School of Law, taught by Professor Bill Henderson, advances students' professional skills through a 1L competency model that focuses on active listening, empathy, self-awareness, asking…

Justice David Prosser converted his campaign fund to a defense fund to aid him in battling allegations of judicial ethics violations. According to the state’s government accountability board, using the campaign fund in this way satisfies the “political purpose” standard because the disciplinary proceeding affects Prosser’s “reputation and electability.”

Eleven of 12 court of appeals judges and two of five supreme court justices have recused themselves from hearing an appeal involving a constitutional challenge to the state’s process for selecting appellate judges. John Jay Hooker, who filed and lost a similar suit in the late 1990s, claims that the constitution requires judges to be elected rather than appointed and that elections should be by grand division rather than statewide.

Earlier this year, the Kansas Senate rejected by a 22-17 vote a proposed statute that would have eliminated the role of the nominating commission in screening court of appeals candidates and required senate confirmation of gubernatorial appointments—a move strongly favored by Governor Brownback and conservative legislators.

State supreme court campaigns have set national fundraising and spending records in recent years, but this year’s races are relatively inexpensive with candidates raising just over $1 million to date.

Regent University School of Law, the newest partner of Educating Tomorrow's Lawyers, integrates some form of professional identity development in nearly all courses. During their time at Regent, students continually revisit the question, 'What Kind…

Denver, Colo. – IAALS, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver, announces the release of Cornerstones of State Judicial Selection: Laying the Foundation for Quality Court Systems and Judges, a new publication from IAALS' Quality Judges Initiative.

IAALS, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver, is proud to announce the release of an updated edition of Navigating the Hazards of E-Discovery: A Manual for Judges in State Courts Across the Nation. This manual is a resource for judges and practitioners alike, providing a foundation for terminology, relevant case law, and other practical information about electronically stored information (ESI).

According to data compiled from The American Bench, women hold 27.5 percent of state judgeships in 2012—a slight increase from 26.8 percent in 2011. At the same time, the percentage of women on the federal bench declined 0.1 percent to 24.1 percent. Representation of women on federal and state courts is highest in the Northeast (30.4 percent) and lowest in the Midwest (24.6 percent).

A former Democratic Party chairman filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block the distribution of matching funds under the pilot public financing program to a Republican supreme court candidate. Candidate Allen Loughry, who is the only one of four high court candidates to accept public funding and who is eligible to receive nearly $150,000 in “rescue” funds, filed a response to the suit.