Judicial Discipline

Governor Scott asked a state law enforcement agency to decide if an investigation is warranted into whether the three justices standing for retention in November violated state law by seeking assistance from court staff in filing election-related paperwork, and two citizens filed a lawsuit asking the secretary of state to remove the three justices from the ballot.

The judicial commission called for the discipline case against Justice David Prosser to be sent to a panel of three court of appeals judges. The role of such a panel is to recommend to the supreme court what, if any, disciplinary action should be taken, but it is unclear whether the supreme court must call for a panel’s consideration of the case.

The content of fliers used in a trial court judge's reelection campaign raised ethical concerns, leading some to call for an inquiry by the state commission on judicial conduct. The fliers tout recent decisions in which the judge sided with oil drillers against the EPA and feature images of Rush Limbaugh.

A grand jury charged Justice Joan Orie Melvin with four felonies and five misdemeanors related to her use of state staffers in her 2003 and 2009 judicial campaigns. Justice Melvin issued a statement announcing that she would voluntarily step aside from the court but was not resigning. The supreme court later suspended her from all judicial and administrative duties.

Numbers may prevent a disciplinary complaint against Justice David Prosser from going any further. Prosser formally requested that two justices recuse themselves from consideration of the complaint against him, and he asked personally that two other justices recuse themselves, on the grounds that these justices were witnesses to the incident that gave rise to the complaint.

A Republican legislator called for an investigation into whether three supreme court justices violated state election law in using court employees to help file their retention candidacy paperwork. The justices learned on the day of the deadline that their financial disclosure forms were incomplete and called a court recess to finalize their submissions.

A district court judge may have violated the state’s code of judicial conduct by writing a letter soliciting campaign contributions for a fellow judge who is running for a state supreme court seat. If a complaint is filed and found to have merit, the judge could be subject to disciplinary action ranging from admonishment to removal from the bench.

The state legislature approved a new judicial discipline system, calling for replacing the existing disciplinary body—the court on the judiciary—with an entity known as the board of judicial conduct. The ten judge members will be appointed by judicial organizations, rather than by the state bar and the supreme court, and the six non-judge members will be chosen by the governor and the speakers of the house and senate.

The senate voted unanimously to replace the existing judicial disciplinary body—the court on the judiciary—with a new entity known as the board of judicial conduct. The state bar and the supreme court would no longer have a role in selecting members of the disciplinary body, and greater transparency in its work would be required.

The state judicial commission is investigating an ethics complaint against Justice David Prosser, stemming from a physical altercation with another justice. The supreme court will ultimately decide whether sanctions should be imposed, and Prosser is expected to ask those colleagues who witnessed the incident to recuse themselves.