The article discusses the evolving standards for judges responding to public criticism, particularly during electoral processes. Renee Knake Jefferson, an ethics professor, emphasizes the potential necessity for judges to engage with the media to clarify misinformation. This topic arose in light of a formal opinion by the California Judicial Ethics Committee regarding appropriate responses from judges in the context of election campaigns. Overall, the conversation underlines the balance judges must strike between maintaining ethical boundaries and ensuring informed public perception.
Media appearances might be beneficial, depending on the circumstances, according to ethics professor Renee Knake Jefferson, who teaches at the University of Houston Law Center. "It may very well be that a judge commenting in a major news outlet is what is needed to correct misinformation so that the public can be informed when they go to vote in a judicial election or recall," she says.
Late last year I had a conversation with David Weisenfeld of the ABA Journal about when it is appropriate for a judge to address public criticism, sparked by the California Judicial Ethics Committee's November 2024 formal opinion on judges responding to criticism during a judicial election or recall campaign.
Collection
[
|
...
]