I think I can hear Castille screaming from miles away …
Anti-casino activists yesterday filed a complaint against state Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille, accusing him of breaching judicial ethics by blasting the plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit accusing his predecessor of colluding with the legislature to secure judicial pay raises.Casino-Free Philadelphia, which is fighting two casinos planned for the city’s waterfront, asked the Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board to investigate Castille for criticizing, and threatening sanctions against, the League of Women Voters in May. Castille issued a written statement regarding the league’s lawsuit, which uses anonymous sources to allege that former Chief Justice Ralph Cappy met secretly with legislators to discuss the pay raise and linked the discussion with future rulings for the casino industry. Pennsylvania judicial canon forbids judges from speaking publicly about cases.
Castille was unavailable for comment, but a court spokesman noted that the case in question was not in state court.
Seems Like a Stretch
This would appear to be a strained interpretation of the no-comment rule, which appears to be directed at litigation that is likely to come before the court on which the commenting judge serves. Here, C.J. Castille was speaking out with respect to a suit filed against his predecessor in a United States District Court. This calls to mind the language of Third Circuit Judge Dolores Sloviter in U.S. v. Criden (if I recall correctly)—when the purpose of the rule stops, there stops the rule.
Beyond that, this complaint is just silly. Someone is on a fool’s errand.
Read the complaint and the rules
It is clear Castille made a comment, he sent out a press release. His comments were a deliberate attempt to intimidate and influence the federal court. That seems to be a direct violation of the no comment rule. Your comment is silly.
Post new comment