Full Version: Judicial Standards
I heard about this on an excellent local radio talk show in St. Louis that, unlike most talk radio, tends to be pretty even handed on the issues. Allman and Smash
There are many implications here. However, the most prominent in my mind is that this man is simply too stupid to be a Judge if he thought this would not come back to haunt him.
Apparently this judge thought it would be a riot to goto a halloween party dressed as a prisoner in handcuffs. I actually would have found that quite amusing myself if he had not decided to add Black-Face o his costume. IMHO this implies that to him, a prisoner is usually black, or, to properly portray a prisoner, one must appear black. Either way, it doesn't speak well of him and could cause any number of his rulings to be questioned.
One of my primary issues with this case however is:
IMHO, either the man is an idiot, and thus should not be a judge or the man is a racist and should not be a judge. How they could possibly feel that this man did not mean to insult African-Americans is beyond me. That they would even think that this is relevant is questionable.
I have reservations here. To me, this could be considered a free speech issue, in that the man has a right to do or say whatever he wants to when it come to commentary and the like, as a citizen. However, Judges are, and I feel they need to be, held to a higher standard. Even the simple appearance of impropriety can cause the integrity of the system to be called into question.
It's the punishment that is baffling to me. Either, you see this as an issue of protected speech to the point where you say he is perfectly within his rights to do this. If you do, why punish the act at all? Or you see it as an act that damages the image of the judiciary in which case, the man should be removed from the bench. To suspend him, even without pay for merely 6 months seems to be a little light considering the potential economic and sociological costs of this action. This light sentence could also be seen by the minority population of the area as further proof that justice, at least in New Orleans is not color-blind.
Another problem is the Fiscal issue. How many African-Americans convicted of crimes by this man will file appeals based on the Judges apparent racism? Even if the appeals are thrown out, how much will this cost the state? Based on the Judges actions, how many might be right?
Questions for Debate:
Was the Judge within his rights to act this way (as a matter of free speech for example) or did he cross the line requiring sanctions?
If you feel he crossed the line, do you feel the punishment was Just?
If you feel it was his right, do you feel he should have been punished or sactioned at all?
Should we hold judges to a higher standard then we hold the average citizen? Is it legal to do so?
As an aside, One argument I heard in regard to this story goes something like this: "What would happen if a black judge put on "white face" and prison garb?" Likely nothing. However, considering that there is a segment of the population that sees all blacks as criminals (or all unidentified criminals as black) and that the judge, a job about as directly contrary to being a criminal as possible (though there are occasional exceptions) in the hypothetical is black, it could easily be seen a satire. Should something happen to this hypothetical judge? That would depend on if you think judges should be held to a higher standard of conduct.
QUOTE
A judge who wore blackface makeup, handcuffs and a jail jumpsuit at a Halloween party will be suspended for six months, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled Monday.
The justices voted 5-2 to suspend Judge Timothy Ellender for a year without pay for dishonoring his position, but to defer half of that penalty. Ellender will lose more than $50,000 in pay, one judge noted.
Source - USATodayThe justices voted 5-2 to suspend Judge Timothy Ellender for a year without pay for dishonoring his position, but to defer half of that penalty. Ellender will lose more than $50,000 in pay, one judge noted.
There are many implications here. However, the most prominent in my mind is that this man is simply too stupid to be a Judge if he thought this would not come back to haunt him.
Apparently this judge thought it would be a riot to goto a halloween party dressed as a prisoner in handcuffs. I actually would have found that quite amusing myself if he had not decided to add Black-Face o his costume. IMHO this implies that to him, a prisoner is usually black, or, to properly portray a prisoner, one must appear black. Either way, it doesn't speak well of him and could cause any number of his rulings to be questioned.
One of my primary issues with this case however is:
QUOTE
The justices agreed Ellender did not mean to insult blacks. Nevertheless, they ordered him to take a sociology course "which will assist him in achieving a greater understanding of racial sensitivity."
IMHO, either the man is an idiot, and thus should not be a judge or the man is a racist and should not be a judge. How they could possibly feel that this man did not mean to insult African-Americans is beyond me. That they would even think that this is relevant is questionable.
I have reservations here. To me, this could be considered a free speech issue, in that the man has a right to do or say whatever he wants to when it come to commentary and the like, as a citizen. However, Judges are, and I feel they need to be, held to a higher standard. Even the simple appearance of impropriety can cause the integrity of the system to be called into question.
It's the punishment that is baffling to me. Either, you see this as an issue of protected speech to the point where you say he is perfectly within his rights to do this. If you do, why punish the act at all? Or you see it as an act that damages the image of the judiciary in which case, the man should be removed from the bench. To suspend him, even without pay for merely 6 months seems to be a little light considering the potential economic and sociological costs of this action. This light sentence could also be seen by the minority population of the area as further proof that justice, at least in New Orleans is not color-blind.
Another problem is the Fiscal issue. How many African-Americans convicted of crimes by this man will file appeals based on the Judges apparent racism? Even if the appeals are thrown out, how much will this cost the state? Based on the Judges actions, how many might be right?
Questions for Debate:
Was the Judge within his rights to act this way (as a matter of free speech for example) or did he cross the line requiring sanctions?
If you feel he crossed the line, do you feel the punishment was Just?
If you feel it was his right, do you feel he should have been punished or sactioned at all?
Should we hold judges to a higher standard then we hold the average citizen? Is it legal to do so?
As an aside, One argument I heard in regard to this story goes something like this: "What would happen if a black judge put on "white face" and prison garb?" Likely nothing. However, considering that there is a segment of the population that sees all blacks as criminals (or all unidentified criminals as black) and that the judge, a job about as directly contrary to being a criminal as possible (though there are occasional exceptions) in the hypothetical is black, it could easily be seen a satire. Should something happen to this hypothetical judge? That would depend on if you think judges should be held to a higher standard of conduct.
Was the Judge within his rights to act this way (as a matter of free speech for example) or did he cross the line requiring sanctions?
I'm a big free speech advocate, so I believe he was absolutely within his rights to do what he did. He didn't commit a crime. Nevertheless, it was in poor taste and I believe that he did deserve sanctions for it. What I'm unclear on is: was this treated as a criminal case or a censure case against the judge? If the latter (which I am assuming), then I believe the ethics panel was perfectly within their rights in sanctioning the judge.
If you feel he crossed the line, do you feel the punishment was Just? If you feel it was his right, do you feel he should have been punished or sanctioned at all?
On the one hand he was rightfully exercising his free speech. On the other hand, he was violating the trust and impartiality associated with jurisprudence. There is no conflict here. The law is clear on this matter; the rules of behavior for judges is also clear. He didn't violate the law but he did violate ethics rules. I may be within my rights to exercise free speech to my coworkers at a restaurant, but I shouldn't be surprised if my free speech happened to violate work rules (like giving away trade secrets) to be sacked.
There is no way in which this judge's "insensitivity" could be anything but racism. In that, I'd disagree with the panel's conclusions. Did he deserve to be fired? I'm not sure. The sanctions he got were pretty severe. I do think he should be (and likely will be) closely watched from now on.
Should we hold judges to a higher standard then we hold the average citizen? Is it legal to do so?
Yes and yes.
I'm a big free speech advocate, so I believe he was absolutely within his rights to do what he did. He didn't commit a crime. Nevertheless, it was in poor taste and I believe that he did deserve sanctions for it. What I'm unclear on is: was this treated as a criminal case or a censure case against the judge? If the latter (which I am assuming), then I believe the ethics panel was perfectly within their rights in sanctioning the judge.
If you feel he crossed the line, do you feel the punishment was Just? If you feel it was his right, do you feel he should have been punished or sanctioned at all?
On the one hand he was rightfully exercising his free speech. On the other hand, he was violating the trust and impartiality associated with jurisprudence. There is no conflict here. The law is clear on this matter; the rules of behavior for judges is also clear. He didn't violate the law but he did violate ethics rules. I may be within my rights to exercise free speech to my coworkers at a restaurant, but I shouldn't be surprised if my free speech happened to violate work rules (like giving away trade secrets) to be sacked.
There is no way in which this judge's "insensitivity" could be anything but racism. In that, I'd disagree with the panel's conclusions. Did he deserve to be fired? I'm not sure. The sanctions he got were pretty severe. I do think he should be (and likely will be) closely watched from now on.
Should we hold judges to a higher standard then we hold the average citizen? Is it legal to do so?
Yes and yes.
First of all, it was a COSTUME at a PARTY. Get over it!
Was the Judge within his rights to act this way (as a matter of free speech for example) or did he cross the line requiring sanctions?
Yes he was within his rights. Was it the wisest thing to do? No, but he still has the right to be a jerk.
If you feel he crossed the line, do you feel the punishment was Just?
I don't think he crossed the line, but the "punishment" if you want to call it that is appropriate.
If you feel it was his right, do you feel he should have been punished or sactioned at all?
When did taking a sociology course become a punishment?
Should we hold judges to a higher standard then we hold the average citizen? Is it legal to do so?
No. We should hold ALL people to the same standards, and they should be high.
Was the Judge within his rights to act this way (as a matter of free speech for example) or did he cross the line requiring sanctions?
Yes he was within his rights. Was it the wisest thing to do? No, but he still has the right to be a jerk.
If you feel he crossed the line, do you feel the punishment was Just?
I don't think he crossed the line, but the "punishment" if you want to call it that is appropriate.
If you feel it was his right, do you feel he should have been punished or sactioned at all?
When did taking a sociology course become a punishment?
Should we hold judges to a higher standard then we hold the average citizen? Is it legal to do so?
No. We should hold ALL people to the same standards, and they should be high.
Was the Judge within his rights to act this way (as a matter of free speech for example) or did he cross the line requiring sanctions?
As a sitting judge, I think he crossed the line.
Do you feel the punishment was Just?
Probably. He did lose $50,000.00 and will spend six months reflecting on his mistake during his suspension.
Should we hold judges to a higher standard then we hold the average citizen? Is it legal to do so?
Yes, we should hold judges to a higher standard. For example, we can't demand from the average citizen that they conduct themselves in an impartial and racially unbiased manner. If they want to be racially bigoted, and speak out about the superiority of their race and the inferiority of others, it's a free country. But when it comes to the judiciary, we can and should demand higher standards and appropriate conduct. Being a judge is a privilege, not a right.
Actually, the panel didn't conclude that the judge wasn't racist. They only agreed that the judge didn't intentionally set out to insult blacks. His actions were insulting; but the transgression resulted not from a deliberate intention on the judge's part to insult, but stupidity and racist insensitivity.
Like it or not, intent is relevant. Perhaps we should consider that we weren't at the hearings, that the panel had the full range of facts to consider, and the findings and sanctions could have been appropriate based on the evidence.
As a sitting judge, I think he crossed the line.
Do you feel the punishment was Just?
Probably. He did lose $50,000.00 and will spend six months reflecting on his mistake during his suspension.
Should we hold judges to a higher standard then we hold the average citizen? Is it legal to do so?
Yes, we should hold judges to a higher standard. For example, we can't demand from the average citizen that they conduct themselves in an impartial and racially unbiased manner. If they want to be racially bigoted, and speak out about the superiority of their race and the inferiority of others, it's a free country. But when it comes to the judiciary, we can and should demand higher standards and appropriate conduct. Being a judge is a privilege, not a right.
QUOTE(Logophage)
There is no way in which this judge's "insensitivity" could be anything but racism. In that, I'd disagree with the panel's conclusions.
Actually, the panel didn't conclude that the judge wasn't racist. They only agreed that the judge didn't intentionally set out to insult blacks. His actions were insulting; but the transgression resulted not from a deliberate intention on the judge's part to insult, but stupidity and racist insensitivity.
QUOTE(OverLandSailor)
IMHO, either the man is an idiot, and thus should not be a judge or the man is a racist and should not be a judge. How they could possibly feel that this man did not mean to insult African-Americans is beyond me. That they would even think that this is relevant is questionable.
Like it or not, intent is relevant. Perhaps we should consider that we weren't at the hearings, that the panel had the full range of facts to consider, and the findings and sanctions could have been appropriate based on the evidence.
QUOTE(Government Mule @ Dec 15 2004, 04:35 PM)
If you feel he crossed the line, do you feel the punishment was Just?
I don't think he crossed the line, but the "punishment" if you want to call it that is appropriate.
If you feel it was his right, do you feel he should have been punished or sactioned at all?
When did taking a sociology course become a punishment?
I don't think he crossed the line, but the "punishment" if you want to call it that is appropriate.
If you feel it was his right, do you feel he should have been punished or sactioned at all?
When did taking a sociology course become a punishment?
Isn't a 6 month supsension without pay punishment?
QUOTE(Azure-Citizen @ Dec 15 2004, 04:47 PM)
QUOTE(OverLandSailor)
IMHO, either the man is an idiot, and thus should not be a judge or the man is a racist and should not be a judge. How they could possibly feel that this man did not mean to insult African-Americans is beyond me. That they would even think that this is relevant is questionable.
Like it or not, intent is relevant. Perhaps we should consider that we weren't at the hearings, that the panel had the full range of facts to consider, and the findings and sanctions could have been appropriate based on the evidence.
I am not sure that intent is relevent. It is relevant in a criminal case, but in the case of eithics violations I don' think it necessarially applies. A judge my not have intended to get drunk when he went to lunch, but the fact that he returned to the bench drunk is still an ethics violation.
This Judge may not have intended to insult the black community, but his actions caused his crediblity to be called into question none the less . That brings discredit upon himself as well as the Judical system in New Orleans. I would think that this in itself would be an ethics violation, regardless of his intent.
As I said before, someone doing this and thinking it is A-OK despite thier position as a judge causes me to call their intelligence into question. If someone is out of touch enough or dumb enough to think this type of behavior is OK for a sitting judge and doesn't foresee the potential negative consequences then IMHO this person is not grounded in reality enough to sit on the bench. That, was point I was trying to make.
[quote=overlandsailor,Dec 15 2004, 12:09 AM]
I heard about this on an excellent local radio talk show in St. Louis that, unlike most talk radio, tends to be pretty even handed on the issues. Allman and Smash
[quote]A judge who wore blackface makeup, handcuffs and a jail jumpsuit at a Halloween party will be suspended for six months, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled Monday.
Questions for Debate:
Was the Judge within his rights to act this way (as a matter of free speech for example) or did he cross the line requiring sanctions?
If you feel he crossed the line, do you feel the punishment was Just?
If you feel it was his right, do you feel he should have been punished or sactioned at all?
Should we hold judges to a higher standard then we hold the average citizen? Is it legal to do so?
[/quote]
Well, if we consider the following, I feel this should answer your questions:
http://www.uscourts.gov/guide/vol2/ch1.html
CHAPTER I. CODE OF CONDUCT FOR UNITED STATES JUDGES
CONTENTS
Canon 1. A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary
Canon 2. A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All Activities
Canon 3. A Judge Should Perform the Duties of the Office Impartially and Diligently
Canon 4. A Judge May Engage in Extra-Judicial Activities To Improve the Law, the Legal System, and the Administration of Justice
Canon 5. A Judge Should Regulate Extra-Judicial Activities To Minimize the Risk of Conflict with Judicial Duties
Canon 6. A Judge Should Regularly File Reports of Compensation Received for Law-Related and Extra-Judicial Activities
Canon 7. A Judge Should Refrain from Political Activity
My personal answers to your questions are:
1 - He was not within his rights and violated the code of conduct
2 - He should be suspended for an entire year with loss of salary, and undergo counseling prior to being reseated.
3 - See 1 & 2 above
4 - Absolutely, a judge is to set an example and be above reproach.
I heard about this on an excellent local radio talk show in St. Louis that, unlike most talk radio, tends to be pretty even handed on the issues. Allman and Smash
[quote]A judge who wore blackface makeup, handcuffs and a jail jumpsuit at a Halloween party will be suspended for six months, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled Monday.
Questions for Debate:
Was the Judge within his rights to act this way (as a matter of free speech for example) or did he cross the line requiring sanctions?
If you feel he crossed the line, do you feel the punishment was Just?
If you feel it was his right, do you feel he should have been punished or sactioned at all?
Should we hold judges to a higher standard then we hold the average citizen? Is it legal to do so?
[/quote]
Well, if we consider the following, I feel this should answer your questions:
http://www.uscourts.gov/guide/vol2/ch1.html
CHAPTER I. CODE OF CONDUCT FOR UNITED STATES JUDGES
CONTENTS
Canon 1. A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary
Canon 2. A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All Activities
Canon 3. A Judge Should Perform the Duties of the Office Impartially and Diligently
Canon 4. A Judge May Engage in Extra-Judicial Activities To Improve the Law, the Legal System, and the Administration of Justice
Canon 5. A Judge Should Regulate Extra-Judicial Activities To Minimize the Risk of Conflict with Judicial Duties
Canon 6. A Judge Should Regularly File Reports of Compensation Received for Law-Related and Extra-Judicial Activities
Canon 7. A Judge Should Refrain from Political Activity
My personal answers to your questions are:
1 - He was not within his rights and violated the code of conduct
2 - He should be suspended for an entire year with loss of salary, and undergo counseling prior to being reseated.
3 - See 1 & 2 above
4 - Absolutely, a judge is to set an example and be above reproach.
I could not help but notice this topic, mainly because I was wondering just what this judge was thinking at the time he was wearing this costume.
Was the Judge within his rights to act this way (as a matter of free speech for example) or did he cross the line requiring sanctions?
Now, although we do have a freedom of speech and the right to express ourselves in a peaceful way, I think that this judge was in the wrong when he put that outfit on. It has always been my impression, not through a code or regulation, but just through experience that a judge is a model citizen. So although he has the right to free speech and expression, in this case I think that he was in the wrong. Any judge acting in this way would seriously damage my belief in their integrity as a judge (not to mention their intelligence).
That's my input.
Was the Judge within his rights to act this way (as a matter of free speech for example) or did he cross the line requiring sanctions?
Now, although we do have a freedom of speech and the right to express ourselves in a peaceful way, I think that this judge was in the wrong when he put that outfit on. It has always been my impression, not through a code or regulation, but just through experience that a judge is a model citizen. So although he has the right to free speech and expression, in this case I think that he was in the wrong. Any judge acting in this way would seriously damage my belief in their integrity as a judge (not to mention their intelligence).
That's my input.
The judge was within his legal rights to enjoy himself. Since when did America become a place where a person wasn't allowed to have humor in their life? Being a judge does have certain stresses but they are easily dismissed at a day when people are more concerned with fun than justice. I'm sure the stresses of the job need a way the vent and this judge was making little quips at the system- does this mean he is some sort of ego-maniac who has flagged all the sacred oathes and bonds of being a man of the law? No.
How can he cross a line when nothing like this has probably ever been documented before? Why should we jump the gun and give this judge such a terrible punishment when the own system he protected usually operates on a warning system? People should not expect a judge to live a spotless life... it is simply impossible. If you examine anyone close enough we are all guilty of being a little estranged, but we have to overlook those things to replace them with all the good a person does. We should be thanking this judge for bringing justice... not punishing him for dressing up. Punishing this judge causes further distrust of the system and should be repealed. It is unjust and it is harmful to the faith in the legal system.
Now although I do not think this judge is guilty of any wrong I do think judges need to be held to a higher level than a businessman. Judges creditability is perhaps the first thing an attorney looks at and if the judge is likely to throw the book at a client and the lawyer has reasonable evidence that the judge smoked pot when he was fifteen then the lawyer will make motions to get a new judge. We should account judges for their mistakes and it may not be a bad idea for them to disclose events so their past won't haunt them when their ability to judge fairly is called into question. We need to have faith in judges before we let judges choices affect the position they are in.
How can he cross a line when nothing like this has probably ever been documented before? Why should we jump the gun and give this judge such a terrible punishment when the own system he protected usually operates on a warning system? People should not expect a judge to live a spotless life... it is simply impossible. If you examine anyone close enough we are all guilty of being a little estranged, but we have to overlook those things to replace them with all the good a person does. We should be thanking this judge for bringing justice... not punishing him for dressing up. Punishing this judge causes further distrust of the system and should be repealed. It is unjust and it is harmful to the faith in the legal system.
Now although I do not think this judge is guilty of any wrong I do think judges need to be held to a higher level than a businessman. Judges creditability is perhaps the first thing an attorney looks at and if the judge is likely to throw the book at a client and the lawyer has reasonable evidence that the judge smoked pot when he was fifteen then the lawyer will make motions to get a new judge. We should account judges for their mistakes and it may not be a bad idea for them to disclose events so their past won't haunt them when their ability to judge fairly is called into question. We need to have faith in judges before we let judges choices affect the position they are in.
Was the Judge within his rights to act this way (as a matter of free speech for example) or did he cross the line requiring sanctions?
Sure.
If you feel he crossed the line, do you feel the punishment was Just?
Not great taste, but I have gone as a pregnant nun so whom am I to say
If you feel it was his right, do you feel he should have been punished or sactioned at all?
Nope. Freedom is freedom. He probably just was doing a role reversal thing.
Should we hold judges to a higher standard then we hold the average citizen? Is it legal to do so?
Yes and yes and no and no. As a Judge he has a higher professional standard and he should be held to it. This Judge, however, was not acting as a Judge when he did what he did, so he should not be held to a higher standard except maybe in the areas of social opinions. It is legal to hold him to a higher standard in the performance of his office, but IMO not in his private life.
Sure.
If you feel he crossed the line, do you feel the punishment was Just?
Not great taste, but I have gone as a pregnant nun so whom am I to say
If you feel it was his right, do you feel he should have been punished or sactioned at all?
Nope. Freedom is freedom. He probably just was doing a role reversal thing.
Should we hold judges to a higher standard then we hold the average citizen? Is it legal to do so?
Yes and yes and no and no. As a Judge he has a higher professional standard and he should be held to it. This Judge, however, was not acting as a Judge when he did what he did, so he should not be held to a higher standard except maybe in the areas of social opinions. It is legal to hold him to a higher standard in the performance of his office, but IMO not in his private life.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.