Constitutional Accountability Center Constitutional Accountability Center
Federal Courts and Nominations

No Trumped-Up Case Of Judicial Bias: Victory In Williams v. Pennsylvania

Washington, DC – On news this morning that the U.S. Supreme court issued its ruling in Williams v. Pennsylvania, holding that under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution “there is an impermissible risk of actual bias when a judge earlier had significant, personal involvement as a prosecutor in a critical decision regarding the defendant’s case,” Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra issued the following reaction:

 

“James Madison wrote in the Federalist Papers that, ‘[n]o man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity.’ In his majority opinion in Williams today, Justice Kennedy underscored this founding principle, saying one cannot act “as both accuser and judge in the same case.” The Court affirmed today that ‘[b]oth the appearance and reality of impartial justice are necessary to the public legitimacy of judicial pronouncements and thus to the rule of law itself.’

 

“In a time when the nation is dealing with trumped-up assertions of judicial bias based on race and ethnicity, this case provided a clear-cut example of what judicial bias really is, and we are gratified that the Court agreed.”

 

#

 

Resources:

 

CAC “friend of the court” brief in Williams v. Pennsylvania: http://theusconstitution.org/cases/williams-v-pennsylvania-us-sup-ct 

 

“Ronald Castille’s role in death-row appeal violated Constitution,” Brianne Gorod, Allentown Morning Call, March 2, 2016: http://www.mcall.com/opinion/yourview/mc-supreme-court-murder-bias-castille-gorod-yv–20160302-story.html 

 

“Trump’s Not The Only One Attacking the Judiciary,” Elizabeth Wydra, Huffington Post, June 8, 2016: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elizabeth-b-wydra/trumps-not-the-only-one-a_b_10364454.html

 

##

 

Constitutional Accountability Center (www.theusconstitution.org) is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history.

 

###

More from Federal Courts and Nominations

Voting Rights and Democracy
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Nairne v. Landry

In Nairne v. Landry, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the Voting Rights Act’s prohibition on vote dilution is a constitutional exercise of Congress’s Fifteenth Amendment enforcement power.
Voting Rights and Democracy
 

United States v. Paxton

In United States v. Paxton, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the Materiality Provision in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits states from denying the right...
Voting Rights and Democracy
 

Mi Familia Vota v. Petersen

In Mi Familia Vota v. Petersen, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is considering whether requiring voters to include their birthplace on voter registration forms violates the Materiality Provision of the...
Rule of Law
 

Iowa v. SEC

In Iowa v. SEC, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is considering the legality of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s new climate-related disclosure requirements.
Rule of Law
 

Chamber of Commerce v. CFPB

In Chamber of Commerce v. CFPB, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering the legality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s update to its Examination Manual clarifying that discrimination may...
Rule of Law
 

Lackey v. Stinnie

In Lackey v. Stinnie, the Supreme Court is considering when a civil rights plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees as the “prevailing party” in a case.