Web shot of justices protested
The state’s judicial ethics board is investigating allegations that several state Supreme Court justices, including a candidate for chief justice, violated judicial rules after a photograph was used on a campaign website.
On Monday, the executive director of the Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission, David Sachar, confirmed that his organization has received an anonymous complaint accusing sitting justice and chief justice hopeful Courtney Goodson — as well as Justices Robin Wynne, Rhonda Wood, Karen Baker and Jo Hart — of violating judicial standards that prevent judges from publicly
endorsing candidates.
Sachar declined to comment further on the allegations made in the complaint — which was dated Oct. 26 — other than to say that his group is still in the process of reviewing the claims.
The complaint stems from a photograph of Goodson, Hart, Wynne, Baker and Wood posing together ( along with Attorney General Leslie Rutledge) after the public investiture of interim Chief Justice Howard Brill on Oct. 23.
The photo was eventually posted to the Facebook page for Goodson’s campaign for chief justice. Goodson, who first joined the court in 2011, has a challenger, Don Kemp, a circuit court judge from Mountain View.
The anonymous complaint claims that Goodson and the other justices violated a judicial tenent that states “a judge shall not abuse the prestige of judicial office to advance the … interests of the judge or others, or allow others to do so.”
“By posing for a photograph that is then used publicly by a political campaign, [ the justices] have lent the prestige of their judicial offices to the Goodson campaign,” the complaint states.
The complaint argued that the use of the photo by Goodson’s campaign was “tantamount” to an endorsement from the other justices, which is prohibited by the Code of Judicial Conduct.
It also accused Goodson of undermining the “integrity and impartiality” of the judiciary by the actions of her husband, John Goodson.
According to complaint, John Goodson and a cadre of fellow attorneys donated more than $ 25,000 to each of the other justices’ campaigns, which the anonymous complainant said “undermines the public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary and creates an appearance of impropriety.”
A spokesman for Courtney Goodson, George Shelton, said early Monday night that he would be unable to offer a comment on the complaint before the newspaper’s deadline.
Reached by phone Monday, Wood said she had not been made aware of the complaint but learned last week that the picture had been posted on Goodson’s campaign site.
“It was a private picture. I don’t even know who took it. … I had no knowledge it was going to be posted on a campaign Facebook page,” Wood said. “It was just a personal picture. I didn’t see it as a campaign picture or an endorsement. No one asked me for permission.”
Asked if she was upset that the photo was put on a campaign site, Wood said she didn’t have any other comment.
Hart and Wynne did not return calls for comment. A staff member for Baker said a statement would come by email, but no email arrived by deadline.
Sachar said that anonymous complaints are handled the same way as those with names attached.
“Obviously, an anonymous complaint has some challenges because there is nobody to follow up with for more information,” Sachar said. “It’s natural to be somewhat skeptical about anonymous complaints. That being said, we’ve received anonymous complaints before that resulted in very good information.”
The former head of the commission, David Stewart, said the complaint filed against Goodson and the others didn’t seem “very serious.”
“I would consider it much ado about nothing,” Stewart said. “In the context of modern- day social media … it seems to me that complaining over a picture that was posted without any dialogue or any context, where it would be an endorsement, around the country, I don’t think it’s an endorsement that would be prohibited [ by judicial ethics].”
Stewart added: “Unfortunately, that’s the nature of the beast in this day and age. When they file complaints that really have no substance to them, when it comes down to it, it does more damage than it should. That’s the way the game is played these days.”