David Badertscher
This posting is essentially a followup of two of our earlier postings on this topic which you can find here and here.
It begins with two statements released by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on May 6, 2010 in partial response to the recent decision in the Comcast case.and continues with a listing of recent Congressional Research Service (CRS) Reports addressing various aspects of the topic:
TITLE: THE SUPREME COURT SUBTITLE: A C-SPAN Book Featuring the Justices in Their Own Words EDITORS: Brian Lamb, Susan Swain, and Mark Farkas PUBLICATION DATE: May 4, 2010
PUBLISHER: Perseus Books PAGE COUNT: 372 pp.
ISBN: 978-1-38648-835-2
Presented by the ABA Criminal Justice Section White Collar Crime Committee Mid-Atlantic Region Subcommittee:
This panel will address the most recent developments in White Collar prosecutions in New Jersey. The Honorable Paul Fishman will describe the challenges facing the United States Attorney’s Office and new initiatives. Seasoned defense and in-house counsel will give their perspectives on recent trends
Moderator:
April, 2010
This Report of the Executive Director to the ABA Board of Governors* highlights issues related to ABA Membership, and Personnel, Also highlighted is an extensive list of Programs and Projects including those related to Bioethics and the Law, Center for Professional Responsibity, Criminal Justice, Family Law, Government Affairs, Immigration, Intellectual Property, Law Library of Congress, Mental Health and Disability, Rule of Law Initiative, Science and Technology Law, Substance Abuse, Women in the Profession, and many more. See the entire Report by clicking on the link below:
April 2010 Report of the American Bar Association Executive Director to the ABA Board of Governors
Selections from the Brennan Center Fair Courts E-lert May 21, 2010.
Summarized news articles and editorials related to the independence of judges and the courts….:
1. A recent George Mason University study suggests that certain factors such as “support for diversity in the state’s leadership,” the “location of a judgeship,” and the “history of diversity” have a significant impact on the success of efforts aimed at enhancing diversity on the state bench – this, irrespective of the judicial selection mechanisms used in a given state. In a broad survey of state trial court judges of color, the report’s authors observed “that the varying selection mechanisms tend to operate to produce a surprising similarity in the processes, strategies, and experiences of judicial candidates . . . [R]ather than a specific selection mechanism, the judges [interviewed] overwhelmingly point to other factors – such as politics, networking, mentorship, and other resources as determinative of the ability of diverse candidates to become judges.” The American Judicature Society has released another important study on judicial diversity, by Malia Reddick, Michael J. Nelson, and Rachel Paine Caufield. The AJS study explores the relationship between judicial diversity and the institutional, political, and legal environment in which judges are selected. Among other conclusions, the study reported that “Merit selection and pure gubernatorial appointment placed more minorities on high courts than did contested elections, while merit selection placed fewer women on intermediate appellate courts.”
Top Ten Stories for Week Ending May 21, 2010.
Legal Ethics Law Firm Partner Accused of Putting Camera Under Employee’s Desk
May 17, 2010 6:42 am CDT
A Service from the ABA Criminal Justice Section, http://www.abanet.org/crimjust
Graham v Florida No. 08–7412.
United States Supreme Court Decision: May 17, 2010
A publication announcemenrt from the New York Professional Responsibility Report (NYPRR)
Comparing The New York Rules of Professional Conduct
to The New York Code of
From: Fair Courts E-lert, May 7, 2010 Published by the Brennan Center for Justice, New York University School of Law.
1. Show Me Better Courts, a Missouri organization seeking to replace the state’s merit selection of judges with contested judicial elections, claims to have raised $1.5 million “to gather petition signatures” to put the organization’s proposal for a constitutional amendment on the November ballot. In a conference call with reporters, director of the organization James Harris said he expected “another $2 million to $4 million will be spent on the fall campaign if enough signatures are valid.” Missourians for Fair and Impartial Courts, “the group leading opposition to the measure,” and defending the so-called “Missouri Plan” has thus far raised approximately $268,000.
Dave Helling, The Battle Over Missouri’s Courts: A Million Dollar Bash, Kansas City Star, May 3, 2010.
Top Ten Stories of the week ending May 7, 2010:
Judiciary Stevens Explains Death Penalty Stance, Bow Ties
May 6, 2010 7:05 am CDT
Criminal Law Library Blog