Divisions easy to read in court rule

By Ed White Associated Press Writer DETROIT (AP) -- A new rule that allows Michigan Supreme Court justices to disqualify each other from cases has produced extraordinary reaction from the bench. Justice Maura Corrigan, who opposed the rule, has predicted a "constitutional crisis" and "permanent siege" on the state's highest court. She quoted Matthew in the New Testament and George Orwell's "Animal Farm" and said people fighting traffic tickets now have more rights than a Supreme Court judge who could be scratched from a case. "The current philosophical and personal divisions on this court are no more than a mild case of acne compared to the cancerous vitriol sure to spew from justices' pens," wrote Corrigan, who was a chief justice when conservatives were in the majority. The court, in a 4-3 vote, said lawyers can ask a justice to disqualify himself or herself based on a perceived bias. If the justice declines, the entire court can step in and act. The policy was approved Nov. 5 but not announced until last Wednesday night -- along with 34 pages of commentary. Chief Justice Marilyn Kelly said the rule brings the court in line with Michigan's lower courts and puts a clear policy on paper for the first time. "Trial judges are removed from cases against their will in our courts every day and have been for years. ... Whether there will be further 'acrimony' lies, in part, in the hands of each justice," Kelly wrote. She became chief justice after Cliff Taylor, a Republican, was defeated in the 2008 election. After 10 years of having a conservative majority, the court now is dominated by three Democrats and a moderate Republican. The three remaining conservatives, often described as pro-business judges, opposed the rule change. Kelly said the new policy is in the spirit of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision. The court in June removed a West Virginia justice from a case involving a company whose chief executive spent more than $3 million on his election. Michigan Justice Elizabeth Weaver, who supported the new rule, said decisions about whether a justice stays on a case, steps aside or is removed by colleagues will be in writing, providing the public with more information about how the court works. But Justice Robert Young Jr. predicts the policy will stifle free speech. He said candidates for the Supreme Court will be reluctant to talk about issues that could be used as grounds for disqualification if they are elected. "The majority has created a 21st century Star Chamber," Young wrote, referring to a secretive English court that operated until the mid-17th century. Published: Wed, Dec 2, 2009

––––––––––––––––––––
 Subscribe to the Legal News!
 https://test.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available