Much controversy has been stirred by the novel extra-constitutional procedure under which these standards were promulgated. (The Legislature directs the Judicial Council to promulgate unspecified “ethics standards,” which the Legislature, before promulgation, gives the force of law? Legislative and gubernatorial staff play lead roles in advising council draftsmen? Judicial Council functions as administrative agency without standards? Is separation of powers dead in California?)
Even more concern, however, has centered on the extraordinarily prolix draftsmanship of the standards. They run to about 8,000 words, half of which are devoted to “Standard 7,” dealing with arbitrator disclosures — and that doesn’t include either the definitions (in Standard 2) that are necessary to understand Standard 7, or Standard 8 dealing with disqualification of the arbitrator for failure to make a disclosure required by Standard 7.
