A Court in Crisis

The Michigan Supreme Court is in full crisis mode. Justice Weaver recently released her dissent to the denial of a stay in the Geoffrey Fieger attorney discipline matter, and she has now released a memo expressing her dissent to the election of Chief Justice Taylor to a second term as Chief Justice (in Word format). In her dissent, she accuses various Justices of various transgressions, including: Reducing notice for publication of decided cases/opinions to suppress dissenting views; Improperly proposing that votes be traded for certain future conduct; Personally attacking her; Refusing to publish her dissents; Leaving official conference meetings and subsequently meeting in secret; Failing to recuse themselves from hearing Fieger's case while being overtly biased against him. She then says near the end: This dissent to the election of Chief Justice Taylor as Chief Justice reveals only the “tip of the iceberg” of the misuse and abuse of power and the repeated disorderly, unprofessional and unfair performance and conduct of the people’s judicial business by the majority of four, Chief Justice Taylor, and Justices Corrigan, Young, and Markman. . . . . The majority of four’s suppression of dissent, and attempts to suppress dissent, mishandling of administrative duties, and repeated disorderly, unprofessional, and unfair conduct are matters of legitimate public concern. Over the past year and longer, the majority of four has advanced a policy toward greater secrecy and less accountability. I strongly believe that it is past time to let sunlight into the Michigan Supreme Court. An efficient and impartial judiciary is “ill served by casting a cloak of secrecy around the operations of the courts. Attorneys all over the state, defense and plaintiff, civil and criminal, have complained about the current Engler-appointed Court majority. In fact, in a Michigan Lawyer's Weekly poll, 80% felt that some rules regarding recusal of Justices should be promulgated (currently recusal is left to the discretion of an individual Justice). Instead of heeding this call, the Supreme Court closed the matter, failing to adopt recusal standards. Now that one of their own is echoing these complaints, it's clear that there must be some merit to them. I hope the Court gets its act together. It's all over the press (and here). UPDATE: More here and here. UPDATE: CNN has picked up the story, too. UPDATE: More here and here, too. UPDATE: The New York Times has picked up the story as well.