Index Abortion, 46-47 Age and tenure, 13-14, 33-34, 39, 83, Age Discrimination and Employ- Aguilar, Robert P., 22, 38, 39, 61 Article II (U.S. Constitution), 3, 32, Article III (U.S. Constitution), 3, 29, 30, 32, 34, 51, 67, 68 Article IV (U.S. Constitution), 89 Bayh, Birch, 38, 71 Behavior of judges, 3, 5, 7-8, 20, 26, Bias of judges, 55, 56, 74 Brown v. Board of Education, 69 California, 83 California Commission on Judicial California Supreme Court, 82 Chief judges, 5n, 10, 34, 72, 74, Chisolm v. Georgia, 63 Circuit judges, 5n, 40, 74 Civil liberties, 44, 45, 46, 48; protec- Code of conduct. See Standards of Code of Judicial Conduct, 32-33, 54 Compensation: for judges, 13, 19-20, Complaint procedure, 10-11, 71, 10-11, 13, 62, 74-75, 77 Congress, 6, 11-12, 21-22, 62, 64, 89. See also House of Representa- Constitutional amendments, 62-64, Corruption. See Misconduct Criminal liability, 60-62, 66, 75-76 Decisions of courts, 42-44, 55, 57-58, Declaration of Independence, 26 13-14, 34, 37, 39, 66, 72, 74, 84 Dismissal of complaints, 5n, 9, 72, District judges, 5n, 22, 38, 39, 40, Election of state judges, 82 Federal courts, 32, 34, 40-49, 57, 58, Fourteenth Amendment (1868), 63 Gunther, Gerald, 69 Hamilton, Alexander, 27, 28, 30, 32, Hastings, Alcee L., 11, 22, 38, 39, House Judiciary Committee, 22, 68, House of Representatives, 4, 6n, 28, Civil Liberties, and the Ad- Immunity, judicial, 59-60, 87 Income tax evasion, 38, 61 Jefferson, Thomas, 65, 84 Johnson, Albert W., 62 Judicial Conference of the United Judicial councils, 13, 72, 73, 75, Judicial Councils Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disability Judicial review, 27, 29, 31, 48, 57-58, Judicial Tenure Act, 71 Judiciary, 31 Judiciary Act (1802), 33 Kastenmeier, Robert W., 5, 22, 68-69, 76, 87 Kennedy, Edward, 71 Legal doctrines, 58-59 gress; State legislatures Madison, James, 27, 45 Mandatory retirement issue, 13, 34, Marshall, John, 31 Mason, Alpheus T., 20, 35 Mathias, Charles, 38 Mental health facilities, 47, 48 Model Rules of Professional Con- Monitoring: of government pro- grams, 42-44, 47; of judiciary, Mootness doctrine, 58 New Jersey Plan, 28 1980 act. See Judicial Councils Nomination of judges, 29, 32, 51, 82 Oregon v. Mitchell, 63 Oversight committee (proposed), 7-9, Oversight of judiciary, 64-70, 76, 77 Paterson, William, 28 Peer socialization, 12, 14, 52-53 Personal integrity of judges, 3 Political power, 27, 35, 42, 45-46. See Precedent (law), 56-58, 61, 66, 89 Public opinions: influence on Public schools, 47, 48 Quality of judic ary, 14, 40, 65, 77 Racketeering, 38, 61 Randolph, Edmund, 29 Rehnquist, William H., 53 Reports of investigations, 7, 8, 73-74 Ritter, Willis, 39 Role of judiciary, 19, 21, 23, 41-49, Roosevelt, Franklin D., 34 Salary. See Compensation Discipline of judges of judicial candidates, 14, 52 pointment of judges Senate, 29, 38-39, 66, 68, 77, 82; Senate Judiciary Committee, 70, 71, Senate Subcommittee on Im- provements in Machinery, 70, 71 Separation of powers, 21, 31-32, 43, Sixteenth Amendment (1913), 63 Sovereignty, 29, 42, 45-46 Standards of conduct, 3, 20, 26, 32-33, 37, 54-55, 67-68, 78, 82. "Standards Relating to Judicial Standing doctrine, 58 State commissions on judicial State constitutions, 26 State courts, 12, 29, 41-42, 60, 80, State judges, 80, 81, 82 State legislatures, 26, 49, 63, 80 Taft, William Howard, 34 Term of office, 84-86 Thirteenth Amendment (1865), 63 Tydings, Joseph, 5, 70 United States Code, 55-56 Vanderbilt, Arthur T., 31 Voluntary Retirement Pension Act, Warren Court, 57 Wilson, James, 28-29 Wilson, Woodrow, 79 Working Group on Federalism, APPENDIX III.-MATERIALS RELATING TO JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE AND IMPEACHMENT December 23, 1986 Honorable Peter W. Rodino, Jr. Chairman Committee on the Judiciary 2137 Rayburn Bldg. Inside Mail Dear Mr. Chairman: As I reflect on the past Congress and review the summary of activities of my subcommittee, and also as I commence planning for the 100th Congress, it becomes clear to me that the subcommittee should not engage in the arduous and time-consuming task of impeaching Federal judges. In my opinion, we did a good job of investigating and then framing the articles of impeachment against Harry E. Claiborne, especially given the twin pressures of expeditious treatment and due process. However, the project took approximately two months from introduction of H. Res. 461 until passage by the House. This is a lot of time for a subcommittee with a full legislative platter and fifteen active Members. We must also remember that the Claiborne impeachment, which presented the case of a convicted Federal judge, was relatively easy when compared to a possible impeachment of an acquitted judge. In conceptualizing the needs of the committee, we must remember that the 100th Congress will doubtless see at least two impeachment resolutions: one directed against Judge Alcee Hastings, whose impeachment probably will be recommended by the Judicial Conference by March of 1987 at the latest; and another potentially against Judge Walter Nixon, who has been convicted of one count of perjury and whose case is on direct appeal in the Fifth Circuit (oral argument having been heard on December 12). Considered together, these two proceedings will not only take substantial Member, counsel and clerical staff time but also will necessitate the expenditure of committee monies for special counsels, travel, investigative endeavors, space, mail, photocopying and supplies. My budget estimate for these two impeachment inquiries -- which I would be pleased to delineate further independent of this letter $300,000 for Committee costs alone. Senate trials would be separate. - would be approximately Additional House costs for |