Commentary—

Corporate Lobbyists Influence Judges Too

 By James C. Turner

and Suzanne M. Mishkin

What could you do if you found out that the judge hearing your case had taken an all-expense-paid vacation to the Elkhorn Ranch in Big Sky, Mont., with your adversary? Sadly, the answer is “nothing.”

Even worse, it’s not just a single judge who has a problem. Since the 1990s, over 230 judges — more than one-quarter of the federal judiciary — have traveled to resort locations at the expense of private groups that have vested interests in the outcome of federal litigation. Pretending to provide “education” about complex legal issues, some of the nation’s worst polluters wine and dine federal judges at the Sea Pines Plantation in Hilton Head, the Omni Golf Resort & Spa in Tucson and the Ritz-Carlton in Naples, Fla.

Who foots their bills, which run as high as $10,000 per judge? An outfit like “The Foundation on Research and the Environment,” which is in turn funded by major oil and chemical companies including Texaco, Exxon, GE, Monsanto, and Shell.

But the $10,000 gifts come at a price — the judges must attend classes where they are systematically indoctrinated by these special interest groups in lobbying sessions urging “rejection of top-down, command and control environmentalism.”

Make no mistake. The Foundation on Research and the Environment is not shelling out $10,000 gifts to judges out of the kindness of their hearts. They have a carefully planned mission: to shape courtroom verdicts for their financial profit.

Judges are supposed to be above influence. They have a special duty to remain objective, neutral and fair. Yet James Huffman, one of the leaders of the Foundation on Research and the Environment candidly admits they are peddling influence: “If people feel strongly about ideas and they want to influence someone in government, they can — that’s the way the system works.”

On the contrary, this is not the way our system is supposed to work. The Ethics in Government Act prohibits employees of all three branches of government from accepting “anything of value” from those whose interests may be affected by their actions, and allows each branch to establish specific rules for itself.

The Executive Branch imposes strict limitations on gifts (no more than $20 in value), while Congress has similar gift restrictions (no more than $50 in value). In fact, if cabinet members or senators accept a lavish $10,000 vacation package, they are breaking the law. Unfortunately, the judicial branch places no such limitation on federal judges.

Instead, they resist all efforts to end the corrupt junkets they enjoy. When Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) introduced legislation during the last Congress banning judicial attendance at private seminars, the judges asked him to wait and “allow the judiciary further opportunity to propose self-regulation on these important issues.” Rather than curb their lavish perks, last August the judges actually created a new gaping loophole in the rules that limit gifts, deciding that they can accept vacation gifts and attend lobbying sessions as long as the topic is not “directly related” to a specific case they are currently hearing.

These unethical junkets feed a growing distrust of our justice system. By continuing to accept lavish gifts and vacations, our federal judges are not acting as public servants dedicated to integrity, but rather as a special privileged class whose favors are for sale.

Federal judges have made it clear that they are unwilling to police themselves. Now it is up to Congress to step in and restore some sense of responsibility and impartiality. Senator Leahy plans to reintroduce legislation strictly limiting privately funded judicial junkets later this year. This time around, we must demand that Congress put an end to this extravagant and corrupting practice.

(James C. Turner and Suzanne M. Mishkin are executive director and associate counsel, respectively, with HALT — An Organization of Americans for Legal Reform. )