A recent Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline case is highlighting divisions in opinion over whether the Supreme Court has concurrent jurisdiction to address judicial discipline cases.
The Court of Judicial Discipline may have set itself up for a conflict with the Supreme Court in opinions issued in the case of a magisterial district judge charged with ticket-fixing. The court ruled that the justices are not alone in having the authority to suspend judges in trouble on an interim basis.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
