A fair, impartial and independent judiciary is indispensible to a free and democratic society. Public trust and confidence in our courts, the belief that all who come before the courts will be heard, be given a fair and impartial hearing, is the foundation of our justice system.
.jpg)
As John Adams stated, "It is the right of every citizen to be tried by judges as free, impartial and independent as the lot of humanity will admit."
The website of the Standing Committee on Judicial Independence is designed to provide current information and resources on matters pertaining to the fair and impartial administration of justice through our courts, the preservation of an independent judiciary as a co-equal branch of government, and public understanding of our "Least Understood Branch."
We also provide resources to enable lawyers and the public to respond in a timely fashion to unfair and unjust criticism of judges.
We encourage you to visit our website frequently and utilize the resources, policy information, reports, and tools available to you.
William K. Weisenberg, Chair
Standing Committee on Judicial Independence
The committee shall:
- Assist courts, administrative judiciaries and state, local and territorial bar associations in considering and effectuating responses to infringement of judicial independence;
- Encourage public awareness and appreciation of the importance of judicial independence and merit selection to the American judicial system and the rule of law;
- Make recommendations on ways to improve and enhance the institutional independence and efficiency of state, territorial and local judiciaries and encourage appropriate accountability to enhance judicial independence and the efficient administration of justice; and
- Act as a clearinghouse for the Association's activities dealing with the judicial independence of state, local and administrative judiciaries.
 |
Sandra Day O'Connor, keynote speaker at the summit |
Hot off the Press: Latest news on Fair and Impartial State Courts
Media Kit
The ABA Division for Media Relations and Communication Services created an online media kit consisting of content from and relating to the May 7-9, 2009 Summit on Fair and Impartial State Courts in Charlotte, North Carolina. The national summit was sponsored by the ABA Commission on Fair and Impartial State Courts and the National Center for State Courts to foster interbranch cooperation among state officials to maintain justice systems as the foundation for fair government. To access the Kit and learn more about the Presidential Commission on Fair and Impartial State Courts, click here.
ABA Press Releases
Sandra Day O'Connor Cites State Budget Crises as Most Pressing Problem Confronting State Courts
ABA President Calls for Fair and Impartial State Courts
State Officials Plan Actions to Improve Branch Relations, Support Court Funding
Tommy Wells interviewed by The New York Times on the U.S. Supreme Court case, Caperton v. Massey.
On April 24, 2009, in a letter to the editor of the Wall Street Journal, ABA President Tommy Wells advocated that states appoint judges using a judicial nominating commission to identify potential judges.
On March 3, 2009, the day Caperton v. Massey was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court, ABA President Tommy Wells defended judicial independence in a letter to the editor of The New York Times.
On February 19, 2009, ABA President Tommy Wells and 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Bill Pryor argued the topic of judicial independence in a debate in Birmingham coordinated by the Birmingham lawyers chapter of The Federalist Society. Click here for additional coverage from The Huntsville Times.
For your convenience, we have created a snapshot of state judicial selection methods. The states are broken down by:
- States that only use merit selection and/or judicial nominating committees to nominate for life or until mandatory retirement;
- States that only use appointment by the state legislature or governor with re-evaluation terms;
- States that only use only elections, whether partisan or non-partisan; and
- States that use any hybrid of the aforementioned selection methods.
To view our state judicial selection snapshot, including a visual map, click here.
2010 Midyear Meeting
February 3-9, 2010
Orlando, FL
2010 Annual Meeting
August 5-10, 2010
San Francisco, CA
The National Database on Judicial Diversity in State Courts is currently being updated. Please check back soon for the latest information!
 |
Hon. William Maupin, SCJI Chair William Weisenberg, Meryl Chertoff, Prof. Keith Fisher and ABA past President Dennis Archer |
To view the program, click here.
To read more about the program, click here.
To purchase the DVD program recording and corresponding written materials, click here.
ABA President Tommy Wells applauds the Supreme Court’s ruling that judges should withdraw from considering cases before them when contributions to their election campaigns by parties to those cases influenced the outcome of the judge’s election, creating a “serious risk of actual bias.” Click here to read more.
As argued in the ABA amicus curie briefs, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Constitution required the recusal of the West Virginia Supreme Court justice who was elected with the help of more than $3 million in contributions from a coal mining executive. Click here to read more.
West Virginia Recusal Case Could Boost Confidence in Courts
Transcript of March 3, 2009, Supreme Court Oral Arguments
Read about the latest developments from the Standing Committee on Federal Judicial Improvments and the Standing Committee on Judicial Independence, in the new Courtly Currents newsletter.
Introductory Judicial Education
Resolution 113, sponsored by the Standing Committee on Judicial Independence, was unanimously passed by the House of Delegates at the 2009 ABA Midyear Meeting in Boston. Resolution 113 urges states to adopt Introductory Judicial Education programs. SCJI is currently working to launch the program in various states.
Judicial Disqualification Project
In 2007, SCJI received an ABA Enterprise Fund Grant to undertake the judicial disqualification project (JDP). SCJI retained Indiana University law professor Charles Geyh as the consultant to the project. The project staff researched the state of disqualification rules and practices around the country, then developed proposed recommendations to address the problems identified and issued a draft report. The full draft report of the Judicial Disqualification Project is available for viewing.
Appendixes to the Draft Report of the Judicial Disqualification Project:
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Read the most recent draft of the Judicial Disqualification Resolution and Report. |
Judicial Disqualification Project in the News
State Court Assessment Project
The Standing Committee on Judicial Independence launched its State Court Assessment Project (SCAP) in 2005. The project is designed to assist court systems in determining how well they are addressing the needs and concerns of the populace they serve by providing an independent assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a state's court system. The Committee has conducted an assessment in two states, Missouri and New Mexico. These reports are now available.
State Courts Assessment Project Resolution 10D passed in the House of Delegates meeting at the 2008 ABA Annual Meeting in New York.
State Court Assessment Project (SCAP) Recommendation
State Court Assessment Project (SCAP)
Resource Kit on Fair and Impartial Courts/LUB
The Standing Committee on Judicial Independence has updated its resource kit on fair and impartial courts. The resource kit offers a number of useful resources including a sample letter to the editor; a sample op-ed; the Countering the Critics pamphlet; and the recently-released Protecting Our Rights, Protecting Our Courts DVD. We will continue to supplement and update these resources.
Justice in Jeopardy: Justice in Jeopardy presents the final report of the ABA Commission on the 21st Century Judiciary. The ABA House of Delegates adopted the Commission's
recommendations in August 2003. Click to view a downloadable version of the report.
Model Code of Judicial Conduct
2008 Edition
Purchase the Book
View the Report
