Failure to Stink is Judicial Misconduct!

I don't mean to sound blasphemous, but I've often thought that much the Code of Conduct for United States Judges could've come down from Mt. Sinai. They often echo much of the ethics God gave Moses regarding judges.

Although lately, the ABA is steering the Code to eliminate Judges who support organizations like the Boy Scouts of America because the BSA has a policy about homosexuals. (So called "divisive organizations.")

Here in Arizona, our State version of the Code is based on the Federal version. And it is also law for judges, codified as Supreme Court 17A A.R.S. Sup.Ct.Rules Rule 81.

Too bad that judges don't seem to fully abide by the Code, even though it's law. (See. for example, our sister blog about former judge hinson.)

For example, and as it's germane here on the Collateral Damage blog, I just found this great Rule in the Code yesterday. It's RULE 2.15, titled Responding to Judicial and Lawyer Misconduct:

(A) A judge having knowledge that another judge has committed a violation of this code that raises a substantial question regarding the judge’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a judge in other respects shall inform the appropriate authority.

Wow. Do you realize what this is saying? If a judge knows that another judge has committed judicial misconduct, that judge must file a complaint of judicial misconduct against the other. If he doesn't, THAT would be judicial misconduct! (Remind you of anyone?)

In other words, judges are supposed to make a stink about other judges who are corrupt!

The reason? Actually, it's a good one. Stated in the Commentary,

Taking action to address known misconduct is a judge’s obligation. Paragraphs (A) and (B) impose an obligation on the judge to report to the appropriate disciplinary authority the known misconduct of another judge or a lawyer that raises a substantial question regarding the honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness of that judge or lawyer.

Ignoring or denying known misconduct among one’s judicial colleagues or members of the legal profession undermines a judge’s responsibility to participate in efforts to ensure public respect for the justice system. This rule limits the reporting obligation to those offenses that an independent judiciary must vigorously endeavor to prevent.

Did you get that? It's not optional. It's an obligation!

Oh, if only judges would consistently keep this Rule. I know my public respect would be higher.

Unfortunately, when judges won't, it falls to us, concerned citizens, to make a stink.

Unfortunately, I see a few stinkers coming.