1. Absolute ban on all gifts to judges


The opportunity to serve as a judge is a solemn responsibility and a public trust. It should not include an opportunity to reap profit from others through the receipt of gifts. The exchange of favors has no place in the judicial process. Gifts to judges, be they golf junkets or trinkets, should be banned completely.

2. Tightened Anti-Nepotism Policy; Sunset Employment of Judges’ Relatives


Pennsylvania’s Code of Judicial Conduct was finally revised in 2014 to ban longstanding and shameful practices of nepotism. However, while the Code bans judges from hiring their relatives in the future, it says (and does) nothing about the fact that many judges already have their relatives on the public payroll, and that this nepotism continues unchecked. This has to stop. Our Supreme Court should impose a reasonable sunset period (perhaps five years) to allow judges’ family members to find other work -- work outside the chambers and courtrooms of their judicial kin.

3. Require judges to rule on the record or in writing on all motions for recusal


Pennsylvania’s Code of Judicial Conduct calls for judges to recuse themselves in circumstances where their impartiality can reasonably be questioned. The Code should be revised to require judges whose recusal is sought to state on the record their reasons for granting or denying the motion, so all circumstances can be viewed in the light of day, both by the reviewing court and by the public as a whole.

4. Mandated ethics courses for all judicial candidates


We entrust our judges with tremendous power over the lives of others. Recent events have shown that those to whom this power is granted can go seriously astray. Before further abuses occur, it is critical that all who seek judicial office be required to complete a course in judicial ethics. It is not too much to ask judicial candidates to acquire a basic familiarity with best practices in the essential area of proper conduct.

5. Television broadcast of court proceedings


Citizens have an interest, and indeed a right, in knowing what transpires in the courtrooms that they pay for and where justice is done in their name. All proceedings in every Pennsylvania court are presumptively open, and this openness mandated by our Constitution should include television access so that the openness is real. All Pennsylvanians should have the opportunity to view proceedings wherever they may be. Technology allows for such broadcasting to be performed unobtrusively and without distraction. Judges should be afforded the discretion to close proceedings to television in appropriate circumstances, such as cases involving child abuse, certain sexual offenses, matters requiring a measure of confidentiality, and other special situations. [3]

Luzinski's Gut wrote:Anne Marie Slaughter is a complete charlatan and should be banned from any public discourse on foreign policy.

Luzinski's Gut wrote:Anne Marie Slaughter is a complete charlatan and should be banned from any public discourse on foreign policy.

pacino wrote:aren't you guys worried about the FRAUD?!

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:I was unaware that there was online voting

pacino wrote:'companies and governments getting hacked left and right' doesn't mean we can't trust the voting process. there's been no actual evidence of tampering or of fraudelently casted votes in any great or substantial measure. i guess don't vote then.

Houshphandzadeh wrote:

pacino wrote:'companies and governments getting hacked left and right' doesn't mean we can't trust the voting process. there's been no actual evidence of tampering or of fraudelently casted votes in any great or substantial measure. i guess don't vote then.

I didn't say anyone shouldn't vote. I think the idea that voting fraud is a preposterous concept is really weird

jamiethekiller wrote:

Luzinski's Gut wrote:Anne Marie Slaughter is a complete charlatan and should be banned from any public discourse on foreign policy.

i have no skin on either side. whats the thought on this?