Offering common sense solutions for judicial discipline.
How to file a complaint of judicial misconduct
Who?
(From the booklet "You be the Judge!")
Thom S. Paine is a nobody. Really.
If you didn't pick up on it (how could you miss?), he's one of those Fundamental, Evangelical, "born again" types. (Jesus said, "You must be born again.") He's shunned politics most of his adult life, because he'd rather be flying and because voices in the Christian community claim, incorrectly, that Christians shouldn't be involved in politics. But politics is simply religion manifest in government. (He thought he was first to note this, but President Ronald Reagan beat him to it.) Horrified by what we're reaping as a result of a generation of Christians withdrawn from politics, he's playing catch-up. Slightly passed mid-age crisis, he's just now old enough to notice history repeating itself and hopes to avoid mistakes of the past. His job is to be found faithful, sounding the trumpet.
THOM’S QUALIFICATIONS > >What?
The Foundation, as our website reflects, is a loosely based, fledgling, grassroots citizen organization narrowly focused on judicial discipline (the lack thereof) and the complaint process. We are good citizens, who, when we see judicial misconduct, are tying to act as Congress charged us, attempting to exercise citizen oversight of the judiciary.
Truly, we are members of the public. We are not lawyers. (Although we seem to play lawyers in our written complaints.) Nor are we Beltway activists. We are true "end-users," if you will, the great unwashed masses who suffer outside the system and are powerless to change it.
But we gotta try.
ABOUT OUR VALUES > >How
We'll be frank. (Some would say we're shooting ourselves in the foot, being so straightforward, since we're hawking a booklet about filing a complaint of judicial misconduct. But hey, we're not used car salesmen here. We want you to know what you're buying into.) Virtually no complaint of judicial misconduct survives in the federal system. [Here's a list of annual reports.]
The States do better. (Scroll down to the bottom of our Examples page for examples.) So there's a real possibility you'll have success in a State matter. Especially one where judges are elected. You might even have, unknown to you, 'inside' help. (Wink, wink, know what I mean?)
That's not because there aren't valid complaints. There are, as we've started to document. For example, if you had filed a complaint against Judge Hittner, even before his suspicious sentencing, yours would have been a valid complaint of judicial misconduct. As we show in our booklet, he violated the law. He should have stepped down from the case because he was a victim of the Enron fiasco. His vindictive sentencing only deepens the impression - if not the actual fact - that he was not an impartial judge. If he's not impartial here, what makes you think he's impartial anywhere? Especially when he rules on your case?
Very early, in the infancy of our country, judges seemed more honorable. Embellishing from a recent DC court of appeals decision:
Edmund Burke justly referred to the "cold neutrality of an impartial judge." Cold or not, federal judges must maintain the appearance of impartiality. What was true two centuries ago is true today: "Deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends upon public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges." Public confidence in judicial impartiality cannot survive if judges disregard their ethical obligations and the law, refusing to remove themselves when the public perceives the appearance of impropriety. "What matters is not the reality of bias or prejudice, but its appearance."
How's your confidence in the integrity and independence of judges today?
The sad fact is, the correction mechanism for the federal system is fatally flawed. About 25 years ago, Congress, ignoring the brilliant system of Checks & Balances our Founders gave us, abrogated its oversight responsibility and left it to judges to judge themselves. Hence, no more Checks & Balances. With predictable results: No discipline.
We're not talking about "Activist Judges" here, with their made-up rulings based on Personal Policy Preferences, although that's a major problem too. Making up law or citing case law from foreign governments is not good behavior and therefore constitutes an impeachable offense. While we touch on that every so often, the Foundation can only do so much. Here we try to narrowly focus on judicial misconduct, which even Liberals sometimes acknowledge as wrong.
Worse, about every ten years, Congress blindly (or naively) listens to the judiciary assure it that all is well. As of this writing, the judiciary is once again evaluating itself and the judicial complaint system. The judges intend to interview "judges, administrators, and practicing lawyers" to hear them say how well the system works. (Asking the public for input seems an after thought.) Do you think they will conclude there are any problems among the brethren?
As you would expect, when you let the fox guard the hen house there is virtually NO discipline of errant (bad) federal judges by judges in the judiciary, as documented by the judiciary's own reports. [Isn't the US a neat country? What other country will openly tell you what a bad job itƆs doing? Truly, we get the government we deserve.]
Unfortunately, there's only so much we can do in our system of government to affect change. And there's already a lot of momentum against us. But it would be sin to remain silent. From the Bible, Leviticus 5:1,
If a person sins because he does not speak up when he hears a public charge to testify regarding something he has seen or learned about, he will be held responsible.
This is somewhat like building the ancient pyramids. We are now building the base, which takes a very long time and isn't very glamorous. It will take generations to complete the project. We doubt we'll see it finished in our lifetime.
Our current goals:
- To make you aware that Congress charged us—ordinary citizens—with oversight of the judiciary.
- To help step you through writing a valid, legitimate complaint of judicial misconduct (or disability) when you see same.
- To make it so easy to write a complaint, that in a short time,
- every concerned American will know about at least one other concerned American who has filed a legitimate complaint of judicial misconduct
- knows for himself what the system is like
- and can testify about it passionately from first hand experience, having read the complaint and resulting order for himself.
- To act as a public clearing house of sorts, collecting and documenting complaints from good citizens throughout the country so we can keep tabs on the system. (Independent tabs. Not tabs concocted by the government.) Presently, the judiciary hides behind embellished "confidentiality" rules. It won't let anyone see complaints for themselves. This is anathema to a free society.
- Ultimately, then, to have all of us squeak loudly enough to fix the problem. To reach critical mass so that the other two branches of government (primarily the Legislative) exercises their constitutional powers to reign in what we see as an undisciplined and unchecked judiciary. In addition to independent oversight of judges, that means impeachment for "bad behavior" needs to be brought back, and brought back hard.
But be warned.
It seems our lot in life to warn others. Believe it or not, there's occasional talk before Congress about making it illegal to publish complaints of judicial misconduct like we've done on our Examples page. Of course, once they do that (and enforce it at the point of a gun, as with so-called "free speech zones"), it's over. If we are no longer free to talk about the problem, there is no hope of solving the problem. (Kinda like life in Cuba.) We're concerned that after the First Amendment is gone, some might invoke the amendment that follows. Let's try to squeak loudly before then, so Congress acts before public confidence in the judiciary is completely eroded and the foundation for our society is completely gone.
But it may be too late. The next domino has fallen and now an out of control prosecutor can come after you if you make too much noise.
TOP ^^