Raleigh News & Observer Logo

An outrageous blanket of secrecy over NC courts | Raleigh News & Observer

×
  • E-edition
    • Customer Service
    • Support
    • Contact Us
    • About Us
    • FAQ
    • Sponsorships
    • Stay connected
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Facebook
    • Google+
    • Instagram
    • Twitter
    • Social Media Directory
    • N&O Store
    • Buy Photos
    • Databases
    • Archives
    • Newsletters

    • Blogs
    • Columnists
    • Crime
    • Education
    • Health
    • Local
    • North Carolina
    • Nation/World
    • Science
    • Thumbs Up
    • Traffic
    • Weather
    • Weird News
    • All News
    • Counties
    • Durham County
    • Johnston County
    • Orange County
    • Wake County
    • All Sports
    • Baseball
    • Canes
    • College
    • Columns & Blogs
    • High Schools
    • NASCAR & Auto Racing
    • NBA
    • NFL
    • NHL
    • Olympics
    • Outdoors
    • Panthers
    • Soccer
    • Schools
    • Duke
    • East Carolina
    • NC State
    • North Carolina
    • All Politics
    • The North Carolina Influencer Series
    • State Politics
    • Blogs
    • Columnists
    • PolitiFact
    • PolitiFact NC
    • Rob Christensen
    • Under the Dome
    • All Business
    • Blogs
    • Columnists
    • Health Care
    • Personal Finance
    • Real Estate
    • Shop Talk
    • Stocks Center
    • Technology
    • All Living
    • Video Now
    • Best-Kept Secrets
    • Blogs
    • Celebrations
    • Comics
    • Family
    • Fashion
    • Fitness
    • Food
    • Games and Puzzles
    • Home and Garden
    • Horoscopes
    • Mouthful
    • Past Times
    • Pets
    • Religion
    • Travel
    • Video Now
    • Arts News
    • ArtsNow
    • Books
    • Contests
    • Dining
    • Entertainment
    • Games
    • Movies
    • Music
    • Nightlife
    • Television
    • On the Beat
    • Happiness is a Warm TV
    • All Opinion
    • Columnists
    • Dwane Powell
    • Editorials
    • Influencers Opinion
    • Letters
    • Opinion Shop Blog
    • Other Views
    • Submit a Letter
  • Obituaries

    • Advertise with us
    • Place Ad
    • Apartments
    • Cars
    • Homes
    • Jobs
    • Legals
    • Obits/In Memoriams
    • Weddings
    • Today's Daily Deal
    • Special Sections
    • Today's Circulars
    • Rewards
    • Photo Store
  • Classifieds
  • Jobs
  • Moonlighting
  • Cars
  • Homes
  • Legals

Op-Ed

An outrageous blanket of secrecy over NC courts

By Catharine Arrowood

    ORDER REPRINT →

November 12, 2014 06:41 PM

For the first time in 40 years, North Carolina voters cast their ballots for judges without any information about pending judicial ethics complaints. This bizarre situation resulted from the last-minute passage of House Bill 562, a bill subjected to little public scrutiny or discussion.

The problems with this bill are so great that for the first time in its history, the North Carolina Bar Association – in a letter signed by all living past presidents – asked the governor to veto it. Although the legislative vote indicated that a veto could be sustained, Gov. Pat McCrory signed the bill into law.

House Bill 562 did three things that will erode the integrity of our courts. It:

• Placed all proceedings before the Judicial Standards Commission under a blanket of secrecy. The North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission was created in 1973 to ensure public confidence in our judicial system and the integrity of our judges. Under House Bill 562, even the fact of a complaint is now “confidential” until “issuance of a public reprimand, censure, suspension or removal by the Supreme Court.”

Sign Up and Save

Get six months of free digital access to The News & Observer

SUBSCRIBE WITH GOOGLE

#ReadLocal



• Put the Supreme Court in charge of disciplining itself. Previously, disciplinary action against members of the Supreme Court was handled by a panel from the Court of Appeals. Now, the Supreme Court handles discipline of its own members.



• Removed the commission’s ability to resolve a matter with the issuance of a public reprimand. Tying the commission’s hands in this way means that the commission, which has limited resources, will be forced to take minor violations through the time and expense of two formal hearings, one before a disciplinary panel and the other before the Supreme Court, both of which will be closed to the public. The alternative is to drop the investigation of minor, but important, infractions, meaning that the public is not protected at all.



This change in the law is antithetical to the principles of our system of government. Trials and hearings, whether involving a criminal defendant or a judge, must be fair to both the victim and defendant.

Permitting the Supreme Court to discipline itself does not have the ring of fairness. If a justice on the Supreme Court violates the Code of Judicial Standards while running for re-election or fails to recuse himself or herself appropriately, the Supreme Court itself will be conducting the hearing. And the public will not know about the fact of the proceeding unless and until the court decides if the justice accused is to be disciplined. I cannot imagine that the members of our court find this a palatable or proper process.


A secret trial behind closed doors is the hallmark of a totalitarian government (if indeed any trial is allowed at all), not a democracy. The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires that an accused, no matter his or her status, have a public and open trial. This presumption that our courts will be open, subject to very limited exceptions, also finds roots in the First Amendment. Under the First Amendment, the press and public must be allowed reasonable access to view proceedings in our courts.

In the name of the First Amendment, we now permit every rich person or corporation with a bee in its bonnet to spend millions destroying the good name of an incumbent judge and be largely insulated from liability under the public figure exception of Sullivan v. New York Times. And now our voters are barred from getting the facts.

Why should we continue to select judges by election when voters must rely on 30 seconds of paid for sound bites, not facts, to make their choices? Do we have a right to know what is happening in hearings held by the Judicial Standards Commission and the Supreme Court?

Will we have a fair system if we allow the accused and his or her colleagues on the Supreme Court (who are likely to be witnesses) to decide whether he or she is guilty? What will the public think of one standard of justice for them and another for our Supreme Court?

We have a fine judiciary with only 50 judges being disciplined during the 40 years the commission has been in existence. These questions, however, make plain that the new process places the reputation of our judiciary at risk. We should act to rectify the changes contained in House Bill 562 before the damage is done. And we should re-examine how we go about choosing our judges in the first place.

Catharine Arrowood is president of the North Carolina Bar Association.

  Comments  

Videos

Catherine Lawson: We can face down our demons

Sending military attorneys to border? Bad policy.

View More Video

Trending Stories

NC judge throws out voter ID and income tax constitutional amendments

February 22, 2019 05:38 PM

If the shoe splits, repair it: Nike execs fly in for impromptu talks at Duke

February 21, 2019 08:12 PM

What in the world happened to Zion Williamson’s shoe? A sneaker expert weighs in.

February 21, 2019 05:15 PM

Will Zion Williamson play again for Duke? He’s listed as ‘day-to-day.’

February 21, 2019 04:43 PM

Syracuse basketball coach Jim Boeheim struck and killed a man on Interstate

February 21, 2019 09:54 AM

Read Next

Governing for Christians

Opinion

Governing for Christians

By Gene Nichol

    ORDER REPRINT →

February 21, 2019 07:50 PM

NC lawmakers protect the ‘Lord’s Day’ with ban on Sunday liquor sales

KEEP READING

Sign Up and Save

#ReadLocal

Get six months of free digital access to The News & Observer

SUBSCRIBE WITH GOOGLE

MORE OP-ED

‘Let’s Connect’ seeks better broadband for rural NC

Opinion

‘Let’s Connect’ seeks better broadband for rural NC

February 21, 2019 07:49 PM
Companies should stress value, not short-term profits

Opinion

Companies should stress value, not short-term profits

February 20, 2019 05:59 PM
NC Health Plan changes would put patients first

Opinion

NC Health Plan changes would put patients first

February 18, 2019 03:18 PM
Alarm over late-term abortions is really about banning all abortions

Opinion

Alarm over late-term abortions is really about banning all abortions

February 18, 2019 12:24 PM
Black Durham ready to ride on the light rail

Opinion

Black Durham ready to ride on the light rail

February 17, 2019 01:00 AM
Light rail will benefit all of Orange County

Opinion

Light rail will benefit all of Orange County

February 16, 2019 03:42 PM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

Icon for mobile apps

Raleigh News & Observer App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Start a Subscription
  • Customer Service
  • eEdition
  • Vacation Hold
  • Pay Your Bill
  • Rewards
Learn More
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletters
  • News in Education
  • Triangletoday.com
  • Legal Notices
Advertising
  • Advertise With Us
  • About Our Ads
  • Place a Classified
  • Local Deals
  • N&O Store
  • N&O Photos
Copyright
Commenting Policy
Report News
Privacy Policy
Terms of Use


Back to Story