Click to Watch Video |
Washington (CNN)A
special US judiciary working group set up last December after a
prominent appeals court judge was accused of sexual harassment reported
on Monday that "inappropriate conduct" in the nation's courthouses is
"not limited to a few isolated instances."
Yet
the eight-member group -- which met with scores of former and current
employees of the judiciary and invited comment nationwide -- did not
detail the magnitude of employee abuse in the US judiciary beyond saying
it was "not pervasive." The group also did not note whether, during its
five months of study, any action was taken against individual judges or
other court employees.
The working group, which was established by Chief Justice John Roberts, made several recommendations in its report, including that:
- judges should put a greater priority on improving workplace culture
- the code of conduct should be revised to make clear what behavior is prohibited
- the complaint system should be made more transparent and accessible.
"The
Code of Conduct should make clearer that judges cannot turn a blind eye
to a colleague's mistreatment of employees," said the report filed to
the Judicial Conference, which sets policy for the nation's federal
courts.
The federal judiciary's
#MeToo movement began after former law clerks and other staffers went
public with sexual harassment claims against US Appeals Court Judge Alex
Kozinski, who had served for more than 30 years in California.
Kozinski,
who had been subject to misconduct allegations in 2009, retired in
December after the new claims were made, beginning with a Washington
Post story. A formal misconduct complaint was filed, but judicial
officials declined to investigate because Kozinski retired.
A
CNN special report in January, examining about 5,000 judicial orders
arising from misconduct complaints over the past decade, found that
rarely do the judges overseeing the complaint system find that a claim
-- by a lawyer, litigant or employee -- warrants an investigation. Even
rarer is for any judge to be disciplined. In most cases when a judge
faced serious scrutiny, the CNN report found, the judge retired and
ended all disciplinary proceedings.
Some lawyers and law professors who have
spoken out about flaws in the judiciary's misconduct-complaint system
and tracked the working group's progress praised its initial
recommendations Monday yet noted the lack of findings about the scope of
the problem.
"We really don't know
anything more about the nature and extent of the problem," said
University of Pittsburgh law professor Arthur Hellman, who has long
studied federal courts and misconduct issues. Hellman wondered whether
other reports of egregious behavior by a judge had emerged. "It's very
troubling that we don't have an answer to that question," he said.
But Hellman lauded the group for recommending that avenues for filing complaints be clarified.
Washington
lawyer Jaime Santos, a former law clerk on the 9th US Circuit Court of
Appeals, where Kozinski was based, said she was pleased that more
training was recommended, as well as greater transparency, so that the
system encourages victims to come forward.
The
CNN review found that while 1,000 orders related to misconduct are
posted annually on federal court websites, they contain scant details
and are not categorized in a way that would separate frivolous cases
from those with merit. Simply filing a legitimate grievance can be
difficult, as forms and instructions are not easily retrieved and
explained throughout the 13 regional circuits.
The report released Monday acknowledged that people with valid complaints sometimes hit roadblocks in the judicial bureaucracy.
"The
Working Group received anonymous anecdotal reports about harassment or
other inappropriate behavior that were not properly addressed," the
report said. "It is therefore vital that judges and court executives
ensure, through educational programs, performance reviews, and other
mechanisms ... that judges, executives, supervisors, and managers at
every level throughout the judiciary demonstrate the same strong
commitment to workplace civility."
The
report also noted that, as in the Kozinski situation, any investigation
or discipline for a judge is generally halted if the judge retires. The
report noted that law clerks "expressed concern about the seeming lack
of punishment for a judge who, under allegations of serious misconduct,
retires or resigns and thereby terminates the disciplinary proceeding."
The
Washington Post story that first brought attention to Kozinski
highlighted an account from a woman who said that the judge, based in
Pasadena, California, had asked her to look at pornographic images on
his office computer. Several other women subsequently came forward with
allegations about misconduct.
Kozinski
resigned shortly thereafter, saying he "may not have been mindful
enough of the special challenges and pressures that women face in the
workplace."
When reached for
comment on Monday, Kozinski's lawyer, Susan Estrich, responded in an
email that Kozinski had no further comment. She added that "he denied
the substance of the charges" and had resigned because "he did not wish
to burden the judiciary or his former clerks with [an] investigation."
Full Article & Source:
Judicial 'inappropriate conduct' is broader than isolated incidences, panel finds
We already know. And we also know there's no accountability for it overall. Were it not for the press, we wouldn't even know.
ReplyDeleteI think it's starting to be that it's rare to find a judge who takes the job seriously and approaches it with honesty and integrity. I hope there are still more good judges than bad, but I'm afraid that trend is turning.
ReplyDelete