Arkansas Supreme Court authorizes judge suspensions, orders cooperation with disciplinary probes
A five-member majority of the Arkansas Supreme Court granted the state judicial discipline commission's request for changes to the rules for judges' and justices' conduct in a Thursday per curiam order.
The changes concern accusations of judicial misconduct and disciplinary action against judges and justices who face such allegations. The divide among the Supreme Court justices who supported or dissented from the order mirrored conflicts within the court earlier this year. Chief Justice Karen Baker and Associate Justice Courtney Hudson dissented from the order.
Thursday's order approved two alterations to the Judicial Code of Conduct: a new provision allowing the court to issue interim suspensions of judges accused of crimes or misconduct and an amendment that broadens an existing rule requiring cooperation with disciplinary authorities and prohibiting retaliation.
According to the rule regarding suspensions, the Supreme Court may suspend a judge with pay 'upon notice of the filing of an indictment, information, or complaint charging the judge with a 'serious crime' under state or federal law.'
In_re_Rule_of_Jud._Disc._Enforcement
A 'serious crime' includes 'any felony or lesser crime that reflects adversely on the judge's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a judge in other respects' or any crime involving 'interference with the administration of justice, false swearing, misrepresentation, fraud, deceit, bribery, extortion, misappropriation, theft or an attempt, conspiracy or solicitation of another to commit a 'serious crime,'' the rule states.
The rule is based on a model policy from the American Bar Association, and the Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission specifically asked the high court for the rule, according to the order. The commission investigates complaints about the conduct of judges and justices and has the authority to recommend disciplinary actions.
The rule also allows suspensions for 'other misconduct,' which includes but is not limited to 'witness intimidation, retaliation, or a threat thereof.'
Another portion of the code of conduct states that a judge 'shall cooperate and be candid and honest with judicial and lawyer disciplinary agencies' and must not retaliate 'against a person known or suspected to have assisted or cooperated with an investigation' of judicial misconduct.
The amended provision approved by the Supreme Court majority specifies that intimidation is also prohibited and that the rule applies to 'a judge, justice, special judge/justice, judicial candidate, or judge-elect.'
Earlier this year, the high court ordered the release of a report alleging that Baker harassed judiciary employees on Dec. 4-5, 2024, after she was elected but before she was sworn in as the state's first elected female chief justice.
'Justice Baker intimidated staff, appears to have targeted female employees of color, indicated an intention to retaliate based on her perception of how employees voted, and indicated an intention to retaliate based on her perception of whether employees were cooperating with Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission's investigation into her colleague's conduct,' the report from the Administrative Office of the Courts human resources department states.
UPDATED: Arkansas Supreme Court chief justice harassed court staff, per human resources report
Baker co-signed Hudson's dissenting opinion on Thursday's per curiam order. Hudson wrote that the rule regarding suspensions 'presents legitimate due-process concerns.'
'It contains absolutely no requirement that notice be provided to the impacted judge either before or after the interim suspension or that the judge be allowed an opportunity to respond to an allegation of misconduct,' Hudson wrote.
She also raised the possibility that the rule violates the state and federal constitutions' ban on adopting rules or laws that govern conduct prior to their adoption.
Associate Justice Rhonda Wood responded to Hudson's dissent with a concurring opinion. Wood argued that the new rule creates more due process for judges, not less, because it 'provides guidelines previously nonexistent.'
The rule also 'sets out parameters for the current authority' that the Supreme Court has always had to suspend judges accused of misconduct and is not a completely new policy applied retroactively, Wood wrote.
Judicial conduct has been at the forefront of the Arkansas Supreme Court since September 2024. Five of Hudson's colleagues referred her to the JDDC for 'flagrant breaches of confidentiality' after she filed then-Chief Justice John Dan Kemp's emails into evidence in her attempt to block the release of emails between her, Baker and others in response to a FOIA request from Arkansas Business.
Arkansas Supreme Court refers one of its own for disciplinary investigation
Baker dissented to Hudson's referral to JDDC, and she made transparency a focus of her successful runoff campaign against Wood to succeed Kemp, who did not run for reelection last year.
Within days of taking the oath of office Jan. 1, Baker butted heads with the rest of the court over the scope of her authority as chief justice. Hudson was the only one of Baker's colleagues who did not block the chief justice's attempts to fire 10 judiciary employees and appoint three new judges to the judicial discipline body. The other five justices claimed Baker did not have the authority to make such unilateral decisions without consulting the rest of the court.
Issues of judicial misconduct have not been limited to the Supreme Court this year. Former Monroe County district judge and deputy prosecutor T. David Carruth was sentenced in May to two years in federal prison for making false statements to the FBI. He had been admonished by the JDDC in 2018 for improper conduct in violation of the Judicial Code of Ethics.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
37 minutes ago
- The Hill
Florida GOP, DeSantis may follow Texas's lead
Florida Republicans are increasingly pushing to redraw the state's congressional lines following a similar move by the Texas GOP. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) said Wednesday he is 'very seriously' looking at asking the state Legislature to redraw the state's congressional map, arguing the 2020 census is flawed. Rep. Jimmy Patronis (R-Fla.) came out in favor of redistricting in a post on social platform X, writing that 'Texas can do it, the Free State of Florida can do it 10X better.' Florida Republicans say they were already headed in this direction following a state Supreme Court decision that upheld a congressional map supported by DeSantis and state Republicans. But the plan is gaining even more traction in the wake of Texas Republicans' unveiling of a new congressional map. 'It's picking up steam,' Florida GOP Chair Evan Power told The Hill. 'We were probably heading there with the court decision, but Texas made it top news.' Florida has seen an uptick in population growth following the coronavirus pandemic in 2020. The state has also become solidly Republican over the past decade, with Republicans growing their representation in Congress and once-Democratic strongholds like Miami-Dade and Osceola counties flipping from blue to red. A number of Democratic-held congressional seats could be impacted if redistricting were to take place, including those held in south Florida by Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Jared Moskowitz and Lois Frankel. Rep. Kathy Castor (D) in the Tampa area and Rep. Darren Soto (D) outside of Orlando have also been floated as possible targets. Florida Republicans already hold a 20 to 8 advantage over Democrats in the congressional delegation. Republicans were boosted last month when the state's Supreme Court ruled to uphold a congressional map that blocked a challenge to the elimination of a majority-Black congressional district in the north of the state that previously was represented by former Rep. Al Lawson (D). The area that comprised the former congressional district is now divided among three Republican lawmakers. But DeSantis is not stopping there. The governor has argued that Florida got a 'raw deal' in the 2020 census when the state only gained one congressional seat. The governor said last month he had relayed his concerns to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick after he was sworn in earlier this year and that the Trump administration could be pursuing redoing the census. Additionally, the governor said he believes Florida's Fair District amendments, which a majority of voters approved of in 2010, could conflict with the U.S. Constitution. The amendments say that districts cannot be drawn in a way that hinders minorities voting for their choice of elected representatives. 'There's a lot of people who believe that the Fair District Amendments is unconstitutional, because what it does is, it mandates having race predominate,' DeSantis said this week. 'Whereas, neutrality should really be the constitutional standard.' Patronis also said in his X post that he believes the Fair District Amendments are unconstitutional 'because it violates freedom of speech AND elections are a states rights issue.' 'Time to add more conservatives to Congress, so we can better deliver on President Trump's agenda, finally win the war against woke, cut government waste, and create an economy that moves our country into a new age of prosperity,' Patronis said. Republicans argue that DeSantis and the state's Republicans could be setting an example for other red states to follow. 'DeSantis here sees an opportunity to be a trailblazer for the Republican Party in this sense in that he could be setting up a pilot program that Texas and some of the other states can actually follow,' a Florida Republican strategist said. 'Let's not disillusion ourselves, if he pulls this off, he will be a fan favorite of one person who sits at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue,' the strategist added, referring to Trump. So far, Republicans in the Florida state Legislature have remained publicly quiet about the prospect of pursuing redistricting. This year's state legislative session was extended from 60 days to 105 days and saw tensions emerge between DeSantis and members of his own party. State Rep. Alex Andrade, a vocal Republican critic of DeSantis, said he has not spoken to his colleagues about redistricting. The state lawmaker noted he would support the effort only if the census was redone. 'I get the partisan argument,' Andrade told The Hill. 'I understand we could make hay right now and benefit Republicans but at some point do I care more about my party or the Constitution?' 'If the census were redone, I'd jump all over it,' he said. Florida Democrats warn that a move by DeSantis and the state's Republicans would set a negative precedent. 'It would mean that the governor and the state legislative branch would completely capitulate under Donald Trump,' state House Minority Leader Fentrice Driskell (D) said. 'It's not supposed to be that the president gets to act like a king and say 'do this on my behalf.'' In a Facebook video posted by Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), Soto accused Republicans of wanting to cheat in the election. 'They want to pick their voters rather than voters picking their representatives,' he said. 'You'll see us do whatever we can in the courts to make sure that the Fair Districts Amendments are enforced.' Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesperson Madison Andrus dismissed the effort from Florida Republicans as 'a bold-faced attempt to save their flailing midterm performance by rigging the game.' The effort comes as the nationwide redistricting war heats up and both parties seek to gain seats ahead of next year's midterm elections. In addition to Republicans in Texas and potentially Florida taking a look at redistricting, Democrats in states like California and New Jersey are also exploring their options. 'There's an opportunity and if it better reflects the makeup of a state whether that's Texas or Florida, or to Gavin Newsom's point even California, then you should do it,' a national Republican strategist said. 'These redistricting efforts, if they comply with the law and meet all of the various federal thresholds to get mapped through, if you do that and do it quickly, you're going to increase the likelihood that the president and Republicans in Washington and going to be able to keep pushing things forward,' the strategist continued.
Epoch Times
4 hours ago
- Epoch Times
Trump Says Brazil's Lula Can Call Him ‘Anytime He Wants'
President Donald Trump said Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is welcome to call him 'anytime,' as tensions rise between the two governments over new U.S. tariffs and sanctions on a Brazilian Supreme Court justice. 'He can talk to me anytime he wants,' Trump told reporters on Friday at the White House, speaking of his Brazilian counterpart.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
West Vancouver demolition order halted after appeal court finds judge had conflict
B.C.'s appeal court has overturned an earlier decision upholding a demolition order for a West Vancouver mansion. Homeowner Rosa Dona Este was successful in her bid to overturn the earlier court decision, after it was found the judge who allowed the order to go ahead had previously worked for a law firm representing the municipality and had consulted on the matter of Este's home. Este had argued against the judge's decision about the validity of the demolition order but also raised concerns over the judge's involvement in the case before being appointed to B.C.'s Supreme Court. 'According to Dr. Este, the judge also erred by failing to recuse herself based on a reasonable apprehension of bias,' said the appeal court's decision, handed down earlier this month. 'Este raised this issue prior to the hearing and advanced an application asking the judge to recuse herself on this basis. The judge dismissed the application, noting that almost seven years had elapsed since she had worked at the firm and stating she could not recall having ever been involved in the file or related matters.' While Judge Francesca Marzari had said previously that she did not recall working on the case involving Este's home, a lawyer for the West Vancouver district later filed an affidavit that said Marzari 'had sent an email to employees of the District advising them on matters related to the possible demolition of Dr. Este's home.' 'This information about the judge's prior involvement in the matter under appeal is clearly relevant to Dr. Este's allegation of apprehension of bias. For the reasons that follow, I conclude Dr. Este's applications must be granted,' wrote appeal court Justice Bruce Butler. Butler noted that if the appeal were refused, 'steps could be taken that could lead to irreparable harm to Dr. Este.' 'The balance of convenience, and particularly the overriding concern for maintaining judicial independence and impartiality, weighs in favour of granting a stay,' he wrote. The property in question is a 6,000-sq.-ft. waterfront home at 2668 Bellevue Ave. and was bought in 2003 by Este and her mother, Mina Esteghamat‑Ardakan. Este lived in the home until 2015 when a fire caused extensive damage. The home remained uninhabited and in a derelict state until 2020 when, following a number of neighbour complaints, the district ordered it demolished. Complications arose when the district found Este had rebuilt parts of the home without having sought proper permits or permission from her co-owner. Este's ex-husband, Mehran Taherkhani, also fought the demolition, arguing he had a stake in the matter because of divorce proceedings set for trial in 2026. Este and her mother had also previously been in court, battling over control of the property. sip@ Related Family battle over derelict West Vancouver house doesn't sway judge, who orders demolition to proceed
