Center for Judicial Excellence

Justice. Accountability. Integrity.

  • About Us
    • CJE Board of Directors
    • CJE Staff
  • Donate
  • Contact CJE
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Initiatives
    • Advocacy & Legislation
      • Media Advocacy
      • Policy & Legislation
      • Prior Legislative Victories
    • CJE Youth Speak
      • Forced “Reunification Camps”
    • U.S. Divorce Child Murder Data
    • Educating Oversight Agencies
    • Marin Court Misconduct
  • Resources
    • Family Court Crisis Background
    • Domestic Violence & Child Abuse Resources
    • Pro Bono Services, Self-Help Centers & Court Information
  • Media
    • Allen v. Farrow 2021 Panel Discussion
    • Kids of Divorce Speak Out
    • CJE in the News
      • Online & Print
      • TV & Radio
      • Press Releases
    • The Director’s Corner
    • Special Projects
      • Film
      • Photo Exhibit
      • Slideshow
    • Photo Gallery
  • Events
    • Upcoming Events
      • Advocacy Training
    • Previous Forums & Events
      • Allen v. Farrow 2021 Panel Discussion
      • Santa Monica Weekend
      • People’s Choice Award!
      • 10 Year Anniversary Campaign
  • Take Action!
    • Donate
    • Volunteer
    • Advocacy Training Sign-Up
    • Get Social
  • News
You are here: Home / News / Press Release: Official Report Exposes Crisis at California’s Judicial Oversight Agency

Press Release: Official Report Exposes Crisis at California’s Judicial Oversight Agency

April 25, 2019

First External Review of Commission on Judicial Performance in Nearly 60 Years Urges Sweeping Changes to Agency.

The California State Auditor released a detailed, 85-page report today about its legislatively-ordered investigation into the state’s only judicial oversight agency, the Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP), capping a three-year effort that was led by the Center for Judicial Excellence and a coalition of advocates for increased judicial accountability from across the state.

“When judges know that they can get away with yelling at litigants, having sex with subordinates, and threatening to assault people who come before them with no real consequences, we’ve got a crisis in our judicial branch,” said Kathleen Russell, the executive director of the Center for Judicial Excellence.

“This report shows just how far the CJP has strayed from its core mission to protect the public, and it proves the vital need for sunshine in all three branches of government,” she continued. “We hope that a few brave legislators will step up to help implement the Auditor’s recommendations. The public is counting on their courage and leadership to place a Constitutional Amendment on the ballot to reform the CJP and better protect them from rogue judges who should be disciplined or removed from office,” she said.

A Few Key Findings

  • In about one-third of the cases reviewed, CJP investigators did not take all reasonable steps—interviewing witnesses, obtaining evidence, or observing the judges—to determine the existence or extent of the alleged judicial misconduct.
  • Examples of alleged misconduct that were not investigated include; yelling at litigants, relationship with a subordinate, delegating judicial role to clerks, threatening to assault litigants, improperly barring entry to the courtroom, and improperly delaying a case.
  • The CJP does not evaluate its complaint data to identify potential patterns of judicial misconduct that could merit investigation. This failure to identify patterns of misconduct allowed a judge who was the subject of 12 complaints of serious on-the-bench misconduct to avoid discipline for 10 years. The CJP’s failure to take proactive steps to identify chronic misconduct increases the risk that it will fall short in its duty to protect the public. 
  • The CJP has rarely directed its outreach activities toward members of the public—out of more than 120 events held during a five-year period, only three targeted the general public. The CJP also never holds public meetings to discuss its rules or operations, yet it was created to protect the public from judicial misconduct.
  • In early 2016, the former CJP director claimed to be implementing an online complaint system, but more than three years later, the CJP has not done this. 
  • The case management system used by the CJP is more than 25 years old, and the IT specialist who created it left in 2014, with no written instructions on how to use it. Efforts to hire a replacement for him ceased, so a costly outside consultant helps the CJP deal with an antiquated system that hinders public accessibility.
  • The CJP’s structure and disciplinary proceedings are not aligned with judicial discipline best practices because the commission currently serves as a unitary—or single—body. The American Bar Association recommends a bi-cameral body, which 17 states also use.
  • The CJP continues to use judges called special masters to preside over evidentiary hearings, which are the public trial portion of disciplinary proceedings. This seems to thwart the intent of Proposition 190, which California voters passed in 1994 to increase the public’s role in judicial discipline. The Auditor recommends eliminating them from the process.

A Few Key Recommendations

  • The Legislature should propose and submit to voters an amendment to the California Constitution to reform the CJP’s structure and disciplinary proceedings so they are aligned with best practices and ensure that the public has a significant role in deciding judicial discipline.
  • To ensure that it identifies patterns that may indicate chronic judicial misconduct, the CJP should create and implement procedures that require investigators to review all prior complaints when investigating a judge and determine if the prior complaints are similar to the current allegations.
  • To improve its transparency and accessibility, the CJP should take steps to improve its public outreach, accept online complaints, and hold meetings that are open to the public.

For more information, visit here: https://www.auditor.ca.gov/reports/2016-137/index.html

Download the PDF press release.

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • More
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • Print

Filed Under: News, Press Release

Family Law Documentary Trailer

Recent News

What Happened to Jaevion Riley? 7-Year-Old New Hampshire Boy Dies

January 31, 2023

A seven-year-old boy has died after being … [Read More...]

Ava Wood’s father bought shotgun 16 days before apparent murder-suicide in Baldwinsville

January 24, 2023

BALDWINSVILLE, N.Y. — Christopher Wood purchased … [Read More...]

Alabama police identify 2012 ‘Baby Jane Doe’ remains, arrest parents

January 21, 2023

Alabama police, with the help of DNA technology, … [Read More...]

UPDATE: Man who Allegedly Murdered His Children in Murfreesboro Reportedly Killed his Wife in Alabama Approximately 2-Months Ago

January 20, 2023

(Murfreesboro, TN) We now have more details about … [Read More...]

More news

News Archive

Contact Us

P.O. Box 150793
San Rafael, California 94915
Phone: 415-444-6556
Email:
info@centerforjudicialexcellence.org

Find Us on Facebook

Follow CJE on Twitter

My Tweets

Email List Signup

By entering your email address and clicking "Subscribe" you agree to receive email communications from the Center for Judicial Excellence.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy

Translate This Site

CJE DOES NOT GIVE LEGAL ADVICE. We want to hear your story, however, please be advised, if you choose to share information with us, we can not guarantee your privacy.
The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice. All information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information. This website contains links to other third-party websites. Such links are only for the convenience of the reader, user or browser; CJE and its members do not recommend or endorse the contents of the third-party sites. Readers of this website should contact their attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular legal matter. No reader, user, or browser of this site should act or refrain from acting on the basis of information on this site without first seeking legal advice from counsel in the appropriate jurisdiction. Only your individual attorney can provide assurances whether the information contained herein applies to your particular situation.

 

Copyright © 2023 Center for Judicial Excellence. All Rights Reserved.

Log in