In a legal brief filed Tuesday, 20 legal scholars and former judges argued that granting former Luzerne County judges Michael T. Conahan and Mark A. Ciavarella Jr. judicial immunity from civil suits in the kids-for-cash scandal would make a "mockery" of a legal doctrine designed to protect judicial independence and integrity.
Ciavarella and Conahan, accused of accepting $2.8 million in kickbacks for sending juveniles to two for-profit detention centers, have claimed judicial immunity in civil-rights suits filed by hundreds of those juveniles in U.S. District Court.
The former judges claim they cannot be held liable because the legal doctrine of judicial immunity protects them from civil suits stemming from their official actions.
But in a friend-of-the-court brief filed Tuesday, 20 legal scholars and former judges argue judicial immunity was never intended to protect judges from claims stemming from allegedly criminal activity.
Friend of the Court Motion
Friend of the Court Brief
Conahan's Motion for Immunity
Ciavarella's Motion for Immunity
Full Aricle and Source:
Group of 20 Argues Against Immunity for Ciavarella, Conahan
Conahan Linked to 1990's Cocaine Probe
NASGA Member Attends Hearings