The Ethical Foundations of American Judicial Independence

When one thinks of the independence of the American judiciary, the mind focuses first on federal courts. There have been many pivotal cases in which independent judges stood against the tides of public opinion or the power of the legislative and executive branches. State judges may be less independent than their federal counterparts. Elections are frequently decided not by qualifications (about which the voting public often knows little) but by advertising. Campaign contributions that buy advertising undermine judicial independence by clouding the exercise of judicial judgment with considerations related to financial obligation. Also, state judges typically must win re-appointment or reelection on a relatively frequent basis, sometimes every four or six years. With the shadow of the next campaign looming, it can be hard to focus on doing what is right under the law and the facts, rather than doing what is popular. One factor easily overlooked, but quite significant, is the judicial ethical norms that have developed in the United States. These norms shape the conduct of American judges on a daily basis and give concrete meaning to the idea that judges should be free from undue or inappropriate pressures when performing the duties of office