Saturday, February 9, 2008

Follow-Up to NY Times Column on Judges and Campaign Contributions

Posted by Alan Childress

We posted here on the NY Times column about judicial ethics, which had reported a study by my colleague at Tulane, Vernon Palmer, on the effect of contributions on decisions.  As a follow-up, here is what the legal blogosphere is saying about the article and study: 

541128_judje_hammer This blog post is approval from an ex-Judge (Lee Sarokin of the Third Circuit and D.N.J.), and this one, from Prof. Michael Froomkin at U. Miami Law, worries about the proposal to recuse based on contributions:  is the cure worse than the cancer?  The one from the Wall Street Journal Law Blog features Vernon's photo (and 32 reader comments); it is called "Tulane Law Prof Examines Whether Justices Are For Sale."
And the Jerusalem Post wrote this story, likening the article to John Grisham's new book "The Appeal": 

Grisham seems to have been prescient, since just this week results of an important study of the impact of private money were released. Tulane University law professor Vernon Valentine Palmer was dismayed that Louisiana Supreme Court justices don't recuse themselves from cases involving litigants who contributed to their campaigns.

Update:  Also, I have linked a prior post Mike wrote on a Florida ethics opinion on campaigning judges, which links to an opinion raising many of the same issues.  Here is an article, on the NY Times story, in the ABA Journal

Judicial Ethics and the Courts | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Follow-Up to NY Times Column on Judges and Campaign Contributions:


Post a comment