The chief justice of Canada is the presiding judge of the nine-member Supreme Court of Canada, the highest judicial body in Canada. As such, the chief justice is the highest-ranking judge of the Canadian court system. The Supreme Court Act makes the chief justice, a Crown in Council appointment, meaning the Crown acting on the advice of the prime minister and minister of justice. The chief justice serves until they resign, turn 75 years old, die, or are removed from office for cause. By tradition, a new chief justice is chosen from among the court's incumbent puisne justices.
In the United States, federal judges are judges who serve on courts established under Article Three of the U.S. Constitution. They include the chief justice and associate justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, circuit judges of the U.S. Courts of Appeals, district judges of the U.S. District Courts, and judges of the U.S. Court of International Trade. These judges are often called "Article Three judges".
Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, 536 U.S. 765 (2002), was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the First Amendment rights of candidates for judicial office. In a 5–4 decision, the court ruled that Minnesota's announce clause, which forbade candidates for judicial office from announcing their views on disputed legal and political issues, was unconstitutional.
The Michigan Supreme Court is the highest court in the U.S. state of Michigan. It is Michigan's court of last resort and consists of seven justices. The Court is located in the Michigan Hall of Justice at 925 Ottawa Street in Lansing, the state capital.
The Canadian Judicial Council is the national council of the judiciary of Canada, overseeing the country's federal judges.
William Holcombe Pryor Jr. is an American lawyer who has served as the chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit since 2020. He was appointed as a United States circuit judge of the court by President George W. Bush in 2004. He is a former commissioner of the United States Sentencing Commission. Previously, he was the attorney general of Alabama, from 1997 to 2004.
Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case establishing that a sitting President of the United States has no immunity from civil law litigation, in federal court, for acts done before taking office and unrelated to the office. In particular, there is no temporary immunity and thus no delay of federal cases until the President leaves office.
Arizona v. Evans, 514 U.S. 1 (1995), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court instituted an exclusionary rule exception allowing evidence obtained through a warrantless search to be valid when a police record erroneously indicates the existence of an outstanding warrant due to negligent conduct of a Clerk of Court.
Diane Joyce Humetewa is a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Humetewa is the first Native American woman and the first enrolled tribal member to serve as a U.S. federal judge. She previously served as the United States Attorney for the District of Arizona from 2007 to 2009. Humetewa is also a Professor of Practice at Arizona State University's Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law.
Circuit Judicial Councils are panels of the United States federal courts that are charged with making "necessary and appropriate orders for the effective and expeditious administration of justice" within their circuits. Among their responsibilities is judicial discipline, the formulation of circuit policy, the implementation of policy directives received from the Judicial Conference of the United States, and the annual submission of a report to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts on the number and nature of orders entered during the year that relate to judicial misconduct. Each US judicial circuit has a judicial council, which consists of the chief judge of the circuit and an equal number of circuit judges and district judges of the circuit.
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), was a United States Supreme Court case which held that plaintiffs must present a "plausible" cause of action. Alongside Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, Iqbal raised the threshold which plaintiffs needed to meet. Further, the Court held that government officials are not liable for the actions of their subordinates without evidence that they ordered the allegedly discriminatory activity. At issue was whether current and former federal officials, including FBI Director Robert Mueller and former United States Attorney General John Ashcroft, were entitled to qualified immunity against an allegation that they knew of or condoned racial and religious discrimination against Muslim men detained after the September 11 attacks. The decision also "transformed civil litigation in the federal courts" by making it much easier for courts to dismiss individuals' suits.
In United States law, absolute immunity is a type of sovereign immunity for government officials that confers complete immunity from criminal prosecution and suits for damages, so long as officials are acting within the scope of their duties. The Supreme Court of the United States has consistently held that government officials deserve some type of immunity from lawsuits for damages, and that the common law recognized this immunity. The Court reasons that this immunity is necessary to protect public officials from excessive interference with their responsibilities and from "potentially disabling threats of liability."
Diane Marie Hathaway is a former Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court. Hathaway, a Democrat, was elected on November 4, 2008, to an 8-year term which commenced in January 2009. Hathaway retired from the court effective January 21, 2013, after being charged with felony criminal mortgage fraud, to which Hathaway pleaded guilty on January 29, 2013, and was sentenced to a year in prison.
Michael T. Conahan is an American convicted felon and former judge. He received a J.D. degree from Temple University and went on to serve from 1994 to 2007 as judge on the Court of Common Pleas. During the last four years of his tenure, he was the presiding judge of the county.
The Office for Judicial Complaints (OJC) was an office within the Ministry of Justice which, between 2004 and 2013, managed the handling of complaints against the judiciary of England and Wales. On 1 October 2013 it was replaced by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.
North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711 (1969), is a United States Supreme Court case that forbids judicial “vindictiveness” from playing a role in the increased sentence a defendant receives after a new trial. In sum, due process requires that a defendant be “free of apprehension” of judicial vindictiveness. Time served for a new conviction of the same offense must be “fully credited,” and a trial judge seeking to impose a greater sentence on retrial must affirmatively state the reasons for imposing such a sentence.
William McLeod Wilson is a former judge of the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of New Zealand. In 2010, he became the first New Zealand judge to resign after being accused of judicial misconduct. Wilson was subjected to the first report by the Judicial Conduct Commissioner, which recommended a Judicial Conduct Panel be formed. This report of the Commissioner was prematurely released to the press and subsequent media attention forced Wilson's resignation from the Supreme Court.
The Judiciary of California or the Judicial Branch of California is defined under the California Constitution as holding the judicial power of the state of California which is vested in the Supreme Court, the Courts of Appeal and the Superior Courts. The judiciary has a hierarchical structure with the California Supreme Court at the top, California Courts of Appeal as the primary appellate courts, and the California Superior Courts as the primary trial courts.
The Judiciary of Louisiana is defined under the Constitution and law of Louisiana and is composed of the Louisiana Supreme Court, the Louisiana Circuit Courts of Appeal, the District Courts, the Justice of the Peace Courts, the Mayor's Courts, the City Courts, and the Parish Courts. The Chief Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court is the chief administrator of the judiciary, and its administration is aided by the Judiciary Commission of Louisiana, the Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board, and the Judicial Council of the Supreme Court of Louisiana.
The case Vermont vs Hunt (1982) had two major outcomes. One was a ruling by the Vermont Supreme Court that side judges had the right to vote on plea agreements. The second was a lengthy review of judges' conduct used to reach this conclusion. This resulted in the state Judicial Conduct Board bringing 24 formal charges against three Supreme Court judges.
