Chief Justice Recuses Self From Bradbury Case

Chief Justice Eismann has recused himself in the Judge Bradbury case (In the Matter of the Inquiry Concerning District Court Judge John H. Bradbury, No. 36175). The Chief Justice presided over oral arguments on July 22, but recently issued an order recusing himself.

According to the Spokesman Review, the Chief Justice wrote:

“ 'The only reason for obtaining that information [i.e., who filed the Judicial Complaint against Judge Bradbury] would be retaliation,' the chief justice wrote in his recusal order. That, he wrote, 'could have a chilling effect on others who may desire to report possible violations of the law by members of the judiciary.' So Eismann essentially said he recused himself to remove the basis for the federal lawsuit. Eismann wouldn’t comment on the pending case and said his recusal notice speaks for itself.

Bradbury was incensed by Eismann’s retaliation allegation and said he’s never sought retribution against anyone. 'By asserting the pretext of retribution, Justice Eismann also betrays a profound personal animus against me,' Bradbury declared."

August 16, 2009, Spokesman Review, "Case points out judge’s dual role," by Betsy Z. Russell:
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2009/aug/16/case-points-out-judges-dual-role/

I think the Chief Justice made the right call here. It certainly improves the Court's position in the pending federal lawsuit, although there is more to it than the disclosure issue (See "SCOID Sued in Federal Court," from July 20). Also, it just doesn't look right to the public to have the Chair of the Judicial Council also participate --indeed preside -- over the appeal of a Judicial Council decision, irrespective of what role he had in the proceedings below.