|
Not only are they being asked to sit in judgment of a colleague, but they're also being asked to rule on a lawsuit that would boot their boss out of office. In short, the four associate justices of the Rhode Island Supreme Court are in an awkward position, law professors say. On Tuesday, the four justices heard arguments in a suit that claims Frank J. Williams is no longer the high court's chief justice now that he's on a military review panel. Providence lawyer Keven A. McKenna claims Williams forfeited the state's top judicial job when he joined the federal panel, which is to hear appeals from suspected terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. He claims Williams violated a state constitutional ban on judges accepting appointments from other governments. … "It's a very awkward position to be one appellate judge sitting in judgment of another appellate judge, particularly when that judge, in some regards, functions as their supervisor," said Prof. Andrew Horwitz, of the Roger Williams University Law School. But in this case, there are few other options, law professors said. Since the case is a matter of Rhode Island constitutional law, the Supreme Court is the ultimate authority, so it's not a case that can be passed to federal courts or to courts in other states, they said. … Law Prof. Carl T. Bogus of Roger Williams University agreed that the justices should decide the matter -- as long as they haven't discussed it with Williams.
For a copy of the complete article, contact CJRG. |