Eliminating Judicial Favoratism – New York Judges’ Rules

May 10, 2010

The Fund for Modern Courts has recently made a recommendation to judges in the State of New York. They have recommended to judges, who have accepted a campaign contribution of $1,000 or more from a lawyer or an interested party in a case, to recuse themselves from handling the case. Previously, in 2003, a commission in New York State recommended a $500 cut off for judges to recuse themselves. This suggestion was not accepted by New York Judges.

The best method for eliminating questions involving favoritism related to campaign contributions would be for the State of New York to set up a well thought out politically independent merit selection process for judges. This would eliminate the need for judges to campaign. It would also remove any question as to judicial favoritism regarding campaign contributors.

Elliot S. Schlissel, Esq.

Picture courtsy of progressivestates.org.

2 Responses to “Eliminating Judicial Favoratism – New York Judges’ Rules”

  1. Bill Says:

    The only fair thing to do is to require each judge to maintain a list of all the people that have given him or her contributions. Then if a case comes before him or her where a lawyer or an interested party is on the list, the other side must be made aware of the situation and be given an opportunity to match the contribution so that the case may then be heard on the merits.

  2. Your suggestion won’t work. Wealthy corporations and individuals will always have an advantage.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: