Read the Fine Print: Alarming Impeachment in West Virginia
We watch with alarm the legislative proceedings in West Virginia impeaching all the justices of the Supreme Court of Errors. Not that some of the justices…
August 23, 2018 at 12:08 PM
3 minute read
We watch with alarm the legislative proceedings in West Virginia impeaching all the justices of the Supreme Court of Errors. Not that some of the justices don't richly deserve their fate, but the overwhelming importance of judicial independence in our democracy, of which we lawyers must constantly remind our elected officials, counsels considerably more caution than the West Virginia politicians have thus far shown.
As usual, one should read the fine print before making decisions. One of the four impeached justices was already under indictment. (The fifth justice pleaded guilty to a crime and resigned in July.) Of the three remaining justices, only one, who resigned shortly after the impeachment vote, is charged with what the headlines are all about: extravagant office redecoration expenses. As we read the fine print we see that the impeachment articles voted against the other two justices, Chief Justice Workman and Justice Walker, are only for not putting policies in place to rein in the spending of all the justices, and, in the case of the Chief Justice, for approving allegedly improper expenses of trial judges when sitting on appeals in place of Supreme Court justices. While Chief Justice Workman's supervisory role puts her in a more exposed position than that of Justice Walker, we do not believe that their actions rise to the level of impeachable offenses, even though maladministration is one of the causes for impeachment under the West Virginia Constitution.
Impeachment is a blunt and powerful tool. It is there for criminal acts, to be sure, but its primary role in a constitutional democracy is to remove an officer in the government for a gross abuse of power. Indeed, the impeachment power is a bulwark of the separation of powers, because it is there to prevent an aggrandizement of power to the detriment of the legitimate power of other officers in the government. Perhaps legal but outrageous expenses qualify as a gross abuse of power, but surely a failure of some judges to self-regulate their counterparts within a separate and independent branch of government does not.
The problem with stretching maladministration to find an abuse of power is that it leads to the impeachment power itself being an abuse of power. Once the legislative branch starts removing members of the judicial branch without the most persuasive of reasons, it will thereafter take some brave justices to stick their necks out on anything, including decisions on appeals. When that happens, judicial independence will be a thing of the past.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllADVANCE Act Offers Conn. Opportunity to Enhance Carbon-Free Energy and Improve Reliability With Advanced Nuclear Technologies
Trending Stories
- 1ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Israel's Prime Minister Over Alleged War Crimes in Gaza
- 2Attorney Responds to Outten & Golden Managing Partner's Letter on Dropped Client
- 3Attracted to Thompson Hine's Fee Flexibility, Morgan Lewis Litigator Switches Firms in Chicago
- 4Phila. Attorney Hit With 5-Year Suspension for Mismanaging Firm and Mishandling Cases
- 5Simpson Thacher Replenishes London Ranks With Latest Linklaters Defection
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250