Justice Michael Eakin of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has been told he may be suspended from the bench over raunchy emails. He received this information from the court that handles judicial misconduct cases, The Associated Press reported.
Eakin, who has apologized, will have a chance to respond before the court makes a decision. It was reported earlier this week that Eakin has been charged by the Judicial Conduct Board with violating judicial and constitutional ethics rules. (more…)
Condemning judicial scandals that have shamed Pennsylvania, including the latest one over a state Supreme Court justice’s porn emails, a Scranton Times-Tribune editorial calls for scrapping judicial elections:
“[I]t’s … clear that the state needs a better way to choose appellate judges, to screen them for professional standards and conduct before they get on the ballot and win by virtue of ballot position, ethnic affinity or geographic advantage. That, in turn, means that lawmakers must get the ball rolling on a constitutional amendment switch from election of appellate judges to merit selection and appointment.”
The latest scandal to tar a Pennsylvania Supreme Court justice is due in part to judicial elections that put a greater value on candidate fundraising rather than on qualifications, a Philadelphia Daily News editorial said.
Regarding the porn email scandal swirling around Justice Michael Eakin and other recent episodes, the editorial said, “Scandals, even jail terms, have become common – in part because in Pennsylvania, judges are not appointed because of their abilities or character, but elected based on how much money they can raise and how effective their campaigns are . . . or worse, their position on a ballot.” The editorial was headlined, “SUPREME DISGRACE.”
On Tuesday, the state’s Judicial Conduct Board lodged misconduct charges against Eakin, saying he engaged in conduct “so extreme that it brought the judicial office into disrepute.” The Associated Press summed up the charges this way: “The board said his actions gave the appearance of impropriety, that he didn’t respect the court’s nondiscrimination policy, that he detracted from the dignity of his office and that he sent emails that a person of reasonable sensitivity would find objectionable.” Eakin said he welcomed an opportunity “for transparency of process” and airing of the facts. He has refused calls to resign, and he has apologized for the emails. (more…)
Even as three new justices prepare to take seats on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, the fact that court is tarnished by scandal and viewed dimly in some circles remains a theme of news media attention.
“Pennsylvania’s judicial system has become its own punchline,” said a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette editorial as it called for an outside, independent investigation of possible misconduct by sitting Justice Michael Eakin, the target of allegations about porn emails. “Eakin’s Arrogance,” a Philadelphia Inquirer editorial scolded about the justice’s urging a new agent for the investigation (see Gavel Grab).
Other coverage included, The Associated Press, “Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s 3 justices-elect appraise its battered image, need for changes”; PennLive.com, “Pa. Supreme Court’s tarnished rep tough on sole female justice”; The Times-Tribune, “Stevens wrapping up term on Supreme Court”; and a Times-Tribune commentary about a proposed constitutional amendment to raise the mandatory retirement age for judges, “You’ll be judge … of age.” (more…)
Justice Michael Eakin of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, amid allegations over the exchange of porn emails, has asked that an inquiry be moved from the Judicial Conduct Board to the Court of Judicial Discipline. This would ensure public confidence, he said, according to The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
Recent news media accounts have raised questions about the impartiality of the Judicial Conduct Board (see Gavel Grab). Meanwhile another newspaper, The Times-Tribune, has called for appointment of a special prosecutor. It said in an editorial:
“It is now apparent that the attorney general’s office and at least some Supreme Court chambers operated like a frat house before, and possibly for a time after, Attorney Kathleen Kane took office in 2013. And it’s becoming apparent not only that the system has not operated cleanly, but that it cannot conduct a clean investigation of any aspect of this fiasco.”
An independent, special prosecutor is needed to investigate allegations about porn email and a sitting Pennsylvania Supreme Court justice, as the Judicial Conduct Board has “botched” its job, a Philadelphia Inquirer editorial says.
The editorial notes news reports that a member of the investigative panel received offensive emails similar to those linked to Justice Michael Eakin, and that the board’s chief counsel once represented the justice’s retention election campaign.
“The whole sordid episode points up the need for a more transparent, independent, and effective Judicial Conduct Board to credibly investigate the judiciary’s next scandal,” the editorial concludes. “As for the present one, the board has already missed its chance.”
Will the Pennsylvania Supreme Court be affected by another email porn scandal? The latest headlines suggest that, less than a year after then-Justice Seamus McCaffery resigned following his apology for sending sexually explicit emails, which he had described as private and personal (see Gavel Grab).
The latest headlines are based on statements by Attorney General Kathleen Kane, who is facing criminal charges that she leaked confidential grand jury information to damage a critic. Here are some of the headlines, involving Justice J. Michael Eakin: Philadelphia Inquirer, “Kane says Justice Eakin exchanged porn emails on state servers”; Philadelphia Daily News, “New emails surface in Kathleen Kane saga”; and Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, “Attorney General Kane: Sitting state justice sent, received ‘racial, misogynistic pornography’ on state computers.”(more…)
Earlier this year, the SPLC had filed a complaint against Moore after he advised judges in Alabama not to grant marriage licenses to same sex couples, mentioned the same source. Moore argued probate judges were “part of an independent judicial branch” and “not bound by a federal judge’s order overturning Alabama’s ban on gay marriage.”
Now, the SPLC has filed a supplement to its complaint, contending that Moore has committed ethics violations by “improperly commenting on pending cases” and “saying that he couldn’t accept the gay marriage ruling as binding precedent and would recuse himself in future cases.”
The complaint states that Moore’s “open and blatant disregard for judicial ethics” makes him “unfit to be judge.”
“If Chief Justice Moore wants to make political speeches or be an activist in opposition to same-sex marriage, he is free to do so, but he cannot simultaneously hold his current position on the Alabama Supreme Court,” SPLC President Richard Cohen wrote in the complaint.
The Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct reprimanded a trial judge, Michael Thomas Seiler, in part because the judge decried the “psychopaths” who appear before him in court. Judge Seiler was talking to a Texas Patriot PAC audience, and he also held up a photo of Hannibal Lecter, a fictional serial killer in the “Silence of the Lambs” movie.
According to an ABA Journal article, the commission said the judge’s remarks “could cause reasonable observers to perceive he would not be fair and impartial while presiding in … civil commitment proceedings.” It also said he was “impatient, discourteous and undignified” in statements to attorneys representing sex offenders.(more…)
In a long-running controversy involving former U.S. District Court Judge Richard Cebull of Montana, a U.S. judge has ordered federal officials to preserve hundreds of his emails.
Then-Judge Cebull got in trouble after forwarding a racist and sexist email about President Obama from his courthouse computer (see Gavel Grab), and Indian petitioners asked another federal court to locate and preserve Cebull’s emails as evidence. They want to challenge prior rulings he issued.
U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers has ordered that the emails be kept until January 2019, according to the Associated Press. She did not rule yet on an argument by lawyers for the judiciary that the emails may not be disclosed under federal law.