The Committee to Review the Operations and Structure of the Commission on Judicial Performance held a public meeting on April 19, 2022, to introduce committee members, give a background of the Commission on Judicial Performance and Government Code section 68770 et seq., and accept public comment. The meeting location, agenda, materials, and audio file are available on the committee’s webpage.
As part of the commission’s biennial rules review process, required by commission policy declaration 3.5, the commission invites proposals for changes to its rules. Existing commission rules are available under “Legal Authority.” Proposed rules, amendments, and repeals must be submitted in writing with a statement of the purpose of the proposal and an explanation of how the proposal would achieve that purpose. Proposals may be submitted via email to email@example.com, or via U.S. mail to Emma Bradford, Esq., Legal Advisor to Commissioners, 455 Golden Gate Ave., Suite 14400, San Francisco, CA 94102. The deadline to submit proposals is May 1, 2022.
The Commission on Judicial Performance, established in 1960, is the independent state agency responsible for investigating complaints of judicial misconduct and judicial incapacity and for disciplining judges, pursuant to article VI, section 18 of the California Constitution.
The commission’s mandate is to protect the public, enforce rigorous standards of judicial conduct and maintain public confidence in the integrity and independence of the judicial system. While the majority of California’s judges are committed to maintaining the high standards expected of the judiciary, an effective method of disciplining judges who engage in misconduct is essential to the functioning of our judicial system. Commission proceedings provide a fair and appropriate mechanism to preserve the integrity of the judicial process.
The commission’s jurisdiction includes all judges of California’s superior courts and the justices of the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. The commission also has jurisdiction over former judges for conduct prior to retirement or resignation. Additionally, the commission shares authority with the superior courts for the oversight of court commissioners and referees. The Director-Chief Counsel of the commission is designated as the Supreme Court’s investigator for complaints involving the judges of the State Bar Court. The commission does not have authority over federal judges, judges pro tem or private judges. In addition to its disciplinary function, the commission is responsible for handling judges’ applications for disability retirement.
The commission’s authority is limited to investigating allegations of judicial misconduct and, if warranted, imposing discipline. Judicial misconduct usually involves conduct in conflict with the standards set forth in the Code of Judicial Ethics. The commission cannot change a decision made by any judicial officer; this is a function of the state’s appellate courts. After investigation, and in some cases a public hearing, the commission may impose sanctions ranging from confidential discipline to removal from office.
LAST UPDATED: 4/28/2022.
- Michael F. Murray – Hearing schedule update
- Judith L. Meyer – Public Admonishment
- Public meeting scheduled regarding Committee to Review the Operations and Structure of the Commission on Judicial Performance
- Commission issues 2021 Annual Report, adopts amendments to interim rule 102(s) and invites proposals for rule changes
- Michael F. Murray – Notice of Hearing and Special Masters
- Michael F. Murray – Commission Institutes Formal Proceedings
- Commission announces public meeting using remote technology (Zoom)
- Michael J. O’Gara – Public Admonishment
- Patrick E. Connolly – Public Admonishment