Margie, I shared your same concerns regarding the lack of consequences for the outlandish behavior of JJ.
I was confused and asked a lawyer friend the following question :
“I am wondering, how a judge can violate judicial canons of ethics and rules of conduct, and yet supposedly the only remedy available is to disqualify him from the specific case, the only question being at which point in the case he should be retroactively disqualified, the beginning the middle or the end. The so-called punishment, to be removed from a case, with which he seemed fed up, seems more like a reward. Why no disciplinary hearings or actions as in other professions? What deterrent is there for unprofessional conduct in judges? I don't get it.”
My lawyer friend’s response:
“Short answer: since federal judges are appointed for life, we're all screwed if they're a**holes.
Long answer: they're appointed for life so they can be totally independent of everything else in the entire world and don't have to be accountable to anybody. As we have seen, this is good and bad.”
In summary, Margie, I think I understand now. If only the history books had been as succinct, I wouldn't be learning these things so late in life. |
