Page 7 - ACTL Journal_Sum24

Many Fellows of the College and many state and federal judg- es – some of whom are Judicial Fellows – applauded the Col- lege’s statements. But a handful of Fellows questioned the pro- priety or the wisdom of the College taking sides on what they believed to be a political issue, and they wondered whether the College had issued similar statements condemning attacks on the judiciary that had been launched from the other side of the political aisle. We have. In fact, the College has, fairly recently, condemned disparaging statements attacking judges made by Democratic elected officials, including intemperate attacks on two Supreme Court Justices by Senator Chuck Schumer and on a federal District Court Judge by California Governor Gavin Newsom. I urge all who are interested to re- view the College’s recent press releases and public statements on the topic of judicial independence, which are available on our website.
But some Fellows wondered whether, with this April 2 statement, the College was becoming too politicized and asserted that we should not have issued such a statement during the course of a political campaign.
Here are my thoughts. In September 2006, long before Don- ald Trump was a candidate for office of any kind, the College issued its seminal White Paper Judicial Independence: A Cor-
nerstone of Democracy Which Must Be Defended. The White Paper, which I urge every Fellow to read, describes the his- torical framework for the principle of judicial independence in this country and demonstrates that it is a key safeguard of the Rule of Law. The White Paper provides examples from the civil rights era of federal judges in the Southern states who experienced polemical attacks from elected officials as well as violent attacks by outraged citizens. These judges’ homes were vandalized and their family members threatened following the issuance of judicial orders mandating school and public facilities desegregation, and the enforcement of Black citizens’ voting rights. The White Paper also surveyed legislative and executive incursions on judicial independence -- some legit- imate and others less so -- including efforts by the political branches to “overrule” a judicial decision by precluding juris- diction over specific issues, defunding the judicial branch, or pursuing the impeachment of judges.
Our 2006 White Paper concluded with a call to action, stating: “Lawyers must recognize genuine threats to judicial indepen- dence and, when they arise, call attention to them and con- front them.” And the White Paper, approved by the College’s Executive Committee and Board of Regents nearly twenty years ago, concluded with the following statement of policy:
SUMMER 2024 JOURNAL 6