About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

44 Third Branch 1 (2012)

handle is hein.journals/thirdbran44 and id is 1 raw text is: Newsletter of the Federal Courts Vol. 44 m Number 1 m Special Issue a January 2012 2011 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary n 1920, American baseball fans were jolted by allegations that Chicago White Sox players had participated in a scheme to fix the outcome of the 1919 World Series. The team owners responded to the infamous Black Sox Scandal by selecting a federal districtjudge, Kenesaw Mountain Landis, to serve as Commissioner of Baseball and restore confidence in the sport. The public welcomed the selection of a prominent federal judge to purge corruption from baseball. ButJudge Landis's appointment led to another controversy: Could a federal judge remain on the bench while serving as Baseball Commissioner? That controversy brought to the fore a still broader question: Where do federal judges look for guidance in resolving ethics issues? Since 1789, every federal judge has taken the same solemn oath to administerjustice without respect to persons, to do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and to faithfully and impartially discharge and perform the duties ofjudicial office. But for the first 130 years of the Nation's existence, federal judges had no formal source for guidance on the broad array of ethical issues that might arise in the course ofjudicial service.judge Landis resolved his situation by resigning his judicial commission in 1922 to focus all his efforts on the national past-time. The controversy, however, prompted organized efforts to develop more guidance for judges. That same year, the American Bar Association asked the Nation's new Chief Justice, former President William Howard Taft, to chair a Commission on judicial Ethics. Within two years, ChiefJustice Taft's commission produced the ABA's 1924 Canons ofiudicial Ethics. The 1924 Canons were advisory. As ChiefJustice Taft explained, their 34 general principles served as a guide and reminder that federal and state judges could consult in discharging their duties. Since that time, theJudicial Conference of the United States-the policy-making body for the lower federal courts-has adopted and regularly updated its own Code ofjudicial Conduct to provide guidance to federal judges. The 1924 Canons provided the foundation for that ongoing undertaking. Some observers have recently questioned whether theJudicial Conference's Code of Conduct for United States Judges should apply to the Supreme Court. I would like to use my annual report this year to address that issue, as well as some other related issues that have recently drawn public attention. The space constraints of the annual report prevent me from setting out a detailed disser- tation on judicial ethics. And my judicial responsi- bilities preclude me from commenting on any ongoing. debates about particular issues or the constitutionality of any enacted legislation or pending proposals. But I can provide some clarification on how the justices address John G. Robertsjr. ethical issues and dispel some ethial ssue an disel ome Chief justice of the United States common misconceptions. A. The Code of Conduct for United States Judges What is now known as the Judicial Conference of the United States was created by Congress in 1922 to provide national guidance to the lower federal courts. The ChiefJustice chairs the Judicial Conference, which includes the chiefjudge of each of the 13 federal judicial circuits and a district judge from each circuit. Thejudicial Conference conducts much of its work through 25 committees, including the Committee on Codes of Conduct. As noted, that committee has promulgated and periodically revises the Code of Conduct for United States judges. It also provides advice, on a formal and informal basis, to judges and judicial employees on the meaning and application of the Code's provisions. The Code of Conduct, by its express terms, applies only to lower federal court judges. That reflects a fundamental difference between the Supreme Court and the other federal courts. Article Ill of the Constitution creates only one court, the Supreme Court of the United States, but it empowers Congress to establish additional lower federal courts that the Framers knew the country would need. Congress instituted theJudicial Conference for the benefit of the courts it had created. Because theJudicial Conference is an instrument for the

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most