Wisconsin Perched on Edge of Major Reform

Wisconsin took a major step toward protecting the fairness and impartiality of its Supreme Court with the February 19 passage of a judicial public funding measure by the state Senate.  Days later Justice at Stake held a joint news conference in Madison, joined by the Committee for Economic Development and The Reform Institute, noting broad support among Wisconsin residents and urging the state Assembly to bring the measure to a final vote.  Justice at Stake board member Thomas J. Moyer, the Republican Chief Justice of Ohio, authored a column joining all seven members of the Wisconsin high court calling for the reform.  The need could not be clearer: the state is mired in its second nasty, big-money Supreme Court election in twelve months.    
Read Statements From JAS, CED and The Reform Institute

Federalist Society Opening Multi-Front Battle on Merit Selection

First it was Missouri, then Kansas. Now another chapter of the Federalist Society is taking aim at its state’s courts, this time in Tennessee. A new poll from “the polling company TM” claims to show that voters in Tennessee are unhappy with their state courts and are ready to demand major changes to the “Tennessee Plan” (the state’s modified version of merit selection with retention elections).  For those who have been following the recent game plan of several of the group’s state chapters, the strategy looks familiar.  It’s the same plan deployed in the other states: a poll, a white paper from a friendly academic, fancy online videos, and public relations help from the high-priced folks at CRC (known best for pushing the “Swift Boats” story in the 2004 presidential race).   But the poll’s most interesting question is the one they left out.
For more on the Federalist Society’s Tennessee Poll, Visit Our Blog

FBI Misuse of National Security Letters Shows Why We Have Courts

On March 5, FBI Director Robert Mueller admitted that the FBI continued to misuse national security letters (administrative subpoenas conducted without judicial review) in 2006.  Mueller’s admission follows an audit conducted in 2007 by the OIG documenting numerous FBI violations between 2003-05.  Michael German, ACLU National Security Policy Counsel and former FBI agent, commented: “Instituting judicial oversight would guarantee that someone would be looking over the shoulder of the agents using a tool as invasive as an NSL.” Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, told Mueller, “Everybody wants to stop terrorists…But we also, though, as Americans, we believe in our privacy rights and we want those protected.” Both testimony and a webcast are available online. For more about national security letters and the role of the courts in national security cases, see Justice at Stake’s Courting Danger.

Poll: Corporate Directors Back Disclosure Of Political Spending

A new survey of America’s corporate board directors provides interesting insights into the rise in expenditures by business-backed groups  in judicial elections and other political efforts.  The survey, conducted by Mason-Dixon polling for the Center for Political Accountability, shows that 88 percent favor public disclosure of their corporations’ political spending.  (Indeed, most didn’t know that corporations and trade associations are not required to disclose all of their political spending.)  A majority thought that additional disclosure would not be too burdensome—and 2/3 didn’t think that their political investments were paying off.

Cameras for Federal Courts?

On March 6 the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 10-8 on S 352, the Sunshine in the Courtroom Act of 2007, which provides for media coverage of federal court proceedings at both the trial and appellate level.  The bill, which includes a three-year sunset provision. would give the Judicial Conference of the United States the authority to issue advisory guidelines,  An amendment by the bipartisan bill’s sponsor, Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA), sought to “clarify that nothing in the bill limits the inherent authority of the court to protect witnesses, maintain order and preserve decorum and integrity of the process.” In 2007, the House Judiciary Committee voted 17-11 to approve a companion bill, HR 2128.  The Judicial Conference opposes both bills, citing current policy allowing each federal appeals court to permit photographs, radio and TV coverage (which the Second and Ninth Circuits allow).  The Conference opposes allowing them in federal district courts, noting that the cameras are barred in federal criminal proceedings under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 53.  In November 2005, the American Bar Association asked then-Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) to, “engage the federal judiciary in an ongoing discussion and urge the Judicial Conference to authorize and encourage district courts, courts of appeal and the U.S. Supreme Court to experiment with electronic coverage of their proceedings.”