SCOTUS (Liberal bloc plus Kennedy) just ruled - bought off judges can be a Due Process violation

[usregimechange]

I am glad there are some constitutional limits to corruption. Rack one up for the good guys.

These codes of conduct serve to maintain the integrity of the judiciary and the rule of law. The Conference of the Chief Justices has underscored that the codes are “he principal safeguard against judicial campaign abuses” that threaten to imperil “public confidence in the fairness and integrity of the nation’s elected judges.” Brief for Conference of Chief Justices as Amicus Curiae 4, 11. This is a vital state interest:

“Courts, in our system, elaborate principles of law in the course of resolving disputes. The power and the prerogative of a court to perform this function rest, in the end, upon the respect accorded to its judgments. The citizen’s respect for judgments depends in turn upon the issuing court’s absolute probity. Judicial integrity is, in consequence, a state interest of the highest order.” Republican Party of Minn. v. White, 536 U. S. 765, 793 (2002) (Kennedy, J., concurring).

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-22.ZO.html

[barbtries]

1. it took me a minute to understand your title

i think what you mean is that a bought off judge is a violation of due process? not that bought off judges are allowed to...

[usregimechange]

7. Sorry, the title was confusing, I meant to say that their being bought off "can" at times be

considered a violation of Due Process, not that they "can" violate Due Process.

[izzybeans]

2. can or can't

there may be a typo in the subject heading

This is good news.

[elleng]

5. MAY NOT,

because they 'could' be swayed.

[ShadowLiberal]

3. What's really scary here is this ruling was 5-4

Seriously, what's really scary here is how close the ruling was. I mean the judge in the case who was too biased had over 60% of the money spent on their election paid for by one of the clients in the case. If 60% of your campaign budget isn't significant enough to be biased then what is? Oh wait, that's right, silly me, republican judges can never be biased, that must be what the 4 ultra radical conservatives were thinking, because that's exactly how the founding fathers envisioned judges ruling, entirely based on the political party of the defendant and plaintiff.

[usregimechange]

8. You can say that again

[Xipe Totec]

4. One of the great things about the XVIth century Spanish legal system

Was the concept of residencia.

A judge appointed by the crown served a term, and then was obligated to remain in residence for one year after his term expired, so that his findings and rulings could be examined by an incoming judge, and the people had an opportunity to lodge complaints against the judge.

[elleng]

6. THAT is really interesting!

Imagine the chaos in the U.S.!!!