Justice Comes to Accused Judge

The California Commission on Judicial Performance struck a blow for judicial flexibility and freedom when it decided to dismiss a wrongheaded disciplinary case brought last year against state Court of Appeal Justice J. Anthony Kline of San Francisco.

This was not necessarily a matter of sudden enlightenment. There have been new appointments to the commission by Gov. Gray Davis and the Democratic leaders of the Legislature.

In an unusual case, the commission accused Kline of willful misconduct for his refusal to follow state Supreme Court precedent regarding a controversial settlement procedure in civil cases, since outlawed in federal courts.

California’s top legal experts argued forcefully that the commission was exceeding its authority. Kline’s supporters said that if a state judge is alleged to have said something wrong in a written opinion, the proper resolution is for the state Supreme Court to rule on it.

The state Supreme Court did rule recently that the Judicial Performance Commission can discipline a trial judge only if there is evidence the judge acted out of bad faith. That was probably the last straw for the charge against Kline because it was clear that he was following his professional convictions.

This has been a painful experience for Kline, a respected jurist, but it will have served a purpose if it limits the commission to doing what it is supposed to do--investigate judges alleged to have behaved illegally or unethically.