The state Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission released today a formal recitation of the charges it had earlier decided to bring against Court of Appeals Judge Wendell Griffen. He’s violated the code of judicial conduct, the charges allege, by criticizing appointment of John Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court (good call by Griffen, by the way) and talking critically about the war and discrimination against immigrants and homosexuals.

The U.S. Supreme Court has made it clear that judges enjoy First Amendment rights, but the pony express apparently hasn’t delivered that ruling yet to the strict arbiters of behavior by certain judges in Arkansas.

Advertisement

To be clear: Griffen is not accused of speaking on any topic that has a bearing on cases before his court. To also be clear: this group has not brought charges against a judicial candidate who issued very clear statements of opinion on a case that WAS pending before the court to which he sought election. Griffen happens to be black and the former candidate skating under disciplinary radar happens to be white. We  think the distinction is contextually relevant. The metaphorical necktie party among judicial arbiters was first rounded up on the occasion of Griffen’s remarks on race at the University of Arkansas. He saw problems at  his alma mater. 

To the best of our knowledge, no judge has ever been disciplined for talking about how much he LIKES (versus dislikes) things at the University of Arkansas — or for cheering the Hogs at a football game.

Advertisement

Seems silly? Not at all. The director of the commission has said it’s improper for Griffen to publicly advocate tolerance toward gay people. An anti-gay person might feel he wouldn’t get an even shake in Griffen’s court, he contends. So then, wouldn’t a Longhorn fan have reason to feel uncomfortable in the court of a rabid Hog fan?

They’ll string Griffen up on these charges in June or July. Then the court appeals will begin.

Advertisement

UPDATE: Griffen has issued a lengthy response to the charges. He says some remarks have been misinterpreted by others, but generally says that his remarks do not constitute violations of the code of conduct or else or protected First Amendment speech. He notes — important point that his comments “about matters of general public concern” did not involve “pending or impending litgation or otherwise relate to the exercise of judicial functions or activites.”

Arkansas Times: Your voice in the fight

Are you tired of watered-down news and biased reporting? The Arkansas Times has been fighting for truth and justice for 50 years. As an alternative newspaper in Little Rock, we are tough, determined, and unafraid to take on powerful forces. With over 63,000 Facebook followers, 58,000 Twitter followers, 35,000 Arkansas blog followers, and 70,000 daily email blasts, we are making a difference. But we can't do it without you. Join the 3,400 paid subscribers who support our great journalism and help us hire more writers. Sign up for a subscription today or make a donation of as little as $1 and help keep the Arkansas Times feisty for years to come.

Previous article Where hearts are young and gay Next article Paying the bills