THE JUDICIAL INTEGRITY PROJECT
  • Home
  • Judging Judges
  • Disciplining Judges
  • Nominating Judges
  • Judicial Politics
  • Judicial Reform
  • Contact - Donate
  • Blog
  • Amendment H: Vote NO

lawyer and judge discipline treated differently

11/13/2020

2 Comments

 
Picture
Give us dirty laundry!
 
A Colorado attorney faces a complaint from attorney regulation due to a sexual relationship with a client. The lawyer has not been disciplined, but his name and the proceedings are public. It's in the Denver Post.
 
Compare that with judges. We know a judge was actually disciplined for a sexual relationship with a staff member. It was in the most recent judicial discipline report. But that judge’s name and the proceedings were kept private. So a reporter can’t write a story about the judge.
 
How does this make sense? Judges are public servants. Lawyers aren’t public servants. Yet it is the judges who are protected by an opaque system. Lawyers and judges in similar situations are treated very differently.
 
Why the difference? Shouldn’t judicial discipline proceedings be at least as transparent as lawyer discipline proceedings? Wouldn’t the public’s trust of the judiciary be increased if the allegations against judges were public?
 
Unfortunately, many lawyers don’t even understand the difference in attorney and judicial discipline proceedings. And if they do understand it, they’re afraid to speak up, fearing retaliation from judges.
 
This story in the Denver Post is a prime example of the unfairness in Colorado’s legal system. A judge in the same position as the attorney in the story is protected from public view. A judge is protected from this sort of story being written about the judge.
 
Even when the judge is disciplined, it is kept from public view. Again, it’s all documented (without any names or specific information) in the most recent report from the discipline commission.
 
Colorado needs to stop covering up judicial misconduct.
 
If you haven’t already, please sign our petition. We have more than 800 signatures, but we need more. Legislators are reluctant to make judicial discipline proceedings public. Why?
 
Because under the dome, legislators like to give the judicial lobbyists what they want, even when it’s at the expense of their constituents. Your signature can make a difference. It really can.

2 Comments
Anaheim divorce lawyer link
8/13/2022 02:27:01 pm

A judge in the same position as the attorney in the story is protected from public view. Thank you, amazing post!

Reply
Orange county family law lawyer link
8/13/2022 02:35:02 pm

Lawyers and judges in similar situations are treated very differently. Thank you for the beautiful post!

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Judicial Integrity

    A nonpartisan nonprofit seeking to improve the justice system by advocating for laws that increase transparency, enhance accountability and remove conflicts of interest.

    ​Sign our petition.

    Archives

    October 2024
    September 2024
    March 2023
    February 2023
    October 2022
    August 2022
    June 2022
    March 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    September 2021
    July 2021
    May 2021
    January 2021
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Copyright 2024 by The Judicial Integrity Project.


Colorado Supreme Court. Colorado Court of Appeals. Colorado Judicial Branch. Colorado Commissions on Judicial Performance. Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline, Colorado Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation, Colorado judicial retention elections, Colorado judicial nominating commissions, judicial integrity, judicial reform, judicial selection, judicial performance evaluations
  • Home
  • Judging Judges
  • Disciplining Judges
  • Nominating Judges
  • Judicial Politics
  • Judicial Reform
  • Contact - Donate
  • Blog
  • Amendment H: Vote NO