Brennan Center for Justice

1.         On Friday, activists at courthouses across the country protested on the 2-year anniversary of the Supreme Court’s controversial opinion in Citizens United v. FEC.  Dubbed “Occupy the Courts,” the outgrowth of the Occupy Wall Street movement condemned the 2010 Supreme Court decision that struck limits on union and corporate spending in political campaigns.  Most of the protests were peaceful, but ABC news reports that “[s]ome events around the country saw clashes with local authorities. At Washington’s Supreme Court rally, 11 were arrested after demonstrators dismantled a police barricade before rushing the court plaza and steps. One was arrested inside the building for unlawful entry. At least a dozen were arrested in San Francisco . . . ."

Matthew Larotonda, ‘Occupy the Courts’ Descends on the Supreme Court, ABC News, January 20, 2012.

Court Resources

2.         In an opinion piece at FoxNews.com, ABA president William Robinson and former Attorney General Edwin Meese call for adequate funding of state courts. They warn that “Today, our state courts face budget cuts that threaten the kind of independence [envisioned by the Founders], and intended as well by the drafters of state constitutions. These budget shortfalls limit the ability of the courts to function, and to remain an effective forum to punish criminals and for the American people to resolve disputes.”  The piece concludes by stating that, “[r]egardless of other issues that divide today’s political spectrum, all policy leaders should be able to stand shoulder to shoulder when it comes to the need for adequate and sustainable funding for our courts. Our liberty depends on it.”

Edwin Meese III  & William T. Robinson III, Our liberty depends on funding our courts, so they can protect all of us, FoxNews.com, January 16, 2012.

3.         According to the Associated Press, the New York State Bar Association reported Wednesday that “[f]unding cuts for the state’s courts have led to shorter hours and disruptive delays in cases, and they have even forced people to go through slow lines at metal detectors twice a day at courthouses that now have mandatory midday shutdowns and fewer security staff.”  According to Bar president Vince Doyle, “Court spending reductions affect real people. . . .  They affect children, who are already burdened with family strife and violence. They affect poor people and minorities. They affect businesses seeking to expeditiously resolve disputes."  New York court administrators are currently preparing for a proposed budget for the coming fiscal year that contains additional cuts.  Meanwhile, in Massachusetts, the state Bar Association has launching a public awareness campaign to draw attention to the state’s underfunded courts, and has begun putting up billboards aimed at educating the public about the importance of an adequately funded judiciary.

NY bar association says budget cuts slowed courts, Associated Press, January 18, 2012; Massachusetts Bar Association Campaigns For More Court Funds, Banker and Tradesman, January 18, 2012.

State Judicial Selection

4.         Though North Carolina’s system of publicly financing judicial elections provided the inspiration for similar programs in three other states, an op-ed by Duke law professor Paul D. Carrington laments that North Carolina’s “good system is now dead.”  Carrington argues that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that public "matching funds" like those used in North Carolina “violate the right to free expression of those spending vast sums to speak in support of their favored candidates” means the state has “no choice but to change [its] ways.”  Carrington endorses a plan that would use gubernatorial appointment and “confirmation and retention elections as the means by which our judges would be held politically accountable for their decisions.”  Other editorials urged the adoption of merit selection systems in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Alabama.

Paul D. Carrington, A Better Way to Pick our Judges, Charlotte News Observer, January 18, 2012.

Judicial Misconduct

5.         As two sisters of Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin prepare to go to trial next month for charges of campaign irregularities during the justice’s latest election campaign, calls have mounted for Justice Orie Melvin to step down.  Reports that the justice is the focus of a grand jury probe led by Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. have led several government reformers to call for Justice Orie Melvin to resign, or to take a temporary leave of absence while the grand jury’s investigation proceeds.  To date, Justice Orie Melvin has not indicated any intention to heed these calls.

Charles Thompson, Calls Grow for Supreme Court Justice Melvin to Resign, The Patriot-News, January 18, 2012.