May Judges Attend Privately Funded Educational Programs? Should Judicial Education be Privatized?: Questions of Judicial Ethics and Policy
نویسنده
چکیده
This Article addresses questions of judicial ethics raised by privately-funded judicial seminars and how they are answered by existing legal and ethical standards. It discusses the relevant restrictions and describes the courts’ interpretations. The Article concludes that these interpretations are rooted in reasonable understandings of the current restrictions. It questions whether or not the current standards and processes are sufficient. MAY JUDGES ATTEND PRIVATELY FUNDED EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS? SHOULD JUDICIAL EDUCATION BE PRIVATIZED?: QUESTIONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS AND POLICY
منابع مشابه
Motivation and Judicial Behavior: Expanding the Scope of Inquiry
Among political scientists who study the courts, explanation of judicial behavior is the issue that receives the most attention. That issue is also a major concern in legal scholarship. Of course, judicial behavior takes many forms and occurs in many settings. The aspect of judicial behavior on which scholars typically concentrate is the decisions that appellate courts (and especially the Supre...
متن کاملJudicial integrity: the accountability gap and the Bangalore Principles
The judiciary needs to be independent of outside influence, particularly from political and economic powers. But judicial independence does not mean that judges and court officials should have free rein to behave as they please. Indeed, judicial independence is founded on public trust, and to maintain it, judges must uphold the highest standards of integrity. This chapter focuses on the account...
متن کاملDirecting Retribution: On the Political Control of Lower Court Judges
The sentencing decisions of trial judges are constrained by statutory limits imposed by legislatures. At the same time, judges in many states face periodic review, often by the electorate. We develop a model in which the effects of these features of a judge’s political landscape on judicial behavior interact. The model yields several intriguing results: First, if legislators care about the prop...
متن کاملJudicial Review as a Response to Political Posturing
We use an agency model to analyze the impact of judicial review on the incentives of elected leaders to “posture” by enacting bold but ill-advised policies. We find that judicial review may exacerbate posturing by rescuing leaders from the consequences of unwise policies, but may also discourage posturing by alerting voters to unjustified government action. We further find that judges will defe...
متن کاملParty, Policy, or Duty: Why Does the Supreme Court Invalidate Federal Statutes?
This paper explores three competing accounts of judicial review by comparing the enacting and invalidating coalitions for each of the fifty-three federal statutes struck down by the Supreme Court during its 1981 through 2005 terms. When a Republican judicial coalition invalidates a Democratic statute, the Court’s decision is consistent with a partisan account, and when a conservative judicial c...
متن کامل