In era of partisan lawfare, their absolute immunity comes under increasing scrutiny. BY ALICE GIORDANO
America W
hen a judge enters the courtroom, a bailiff bellows: “All rise.” Those who don’t comply face ejection from the courtroom, and possibly a con-
tempt charge. It’s a form of deference not required even when a U.S. president enters a room. Of the few who dared to defy the practice, which has
no legal grounds, only two had their contempt charges overturned by an appeal court after successfully arguing religious beliefs behind their refusal to stand. One was a Muslim woman, the other was a 1973 case involving a Quaker couple. But the unique judicial immunity is coming under increased scrutiny as judges are becoming more politi- cally partisan. President Donald Trump repeatedly attacked judges overseeing cases brought against him by the Department of Justice under Joe Biden and district attorneys in blue cities, saying the justice system had been weaponized by Democrats. Ironically, Biden also attacked the Justice Department
for being politicized when he pardoned his son Hunter, saying “politics had infected the process.” A mix of bipartisan organizations have called for con- stitutional reforms to turn the nearly absolute immunity of judges into qualified immunity, like that of police and other government officials. The Institute for Justice (IJ), a nonprofit, public inter-
est law firm, has launched the “Project on Immunity and Accountability” based on what it calls a simple idea: “If we the people must follow the law, our government must
As it turns out, judicial immunity was granted to judges by judges. It protects them from being sued for their judicial actions.
14 NEWSMAX | FEBRUARY 2025
Time to Stop Treating Judges Like Gods
MISJUDGED Jamie Coleman (formerly Linda Sparkman) after she unveiled the Indiana eugenics marker. She challenged the judge who ordered her sterilization in the 1978 United States Supreme Court decision.
follow the Constitution.” Unfortunately, IJ adds, government officials who vio-
late the Constitution are shielded from liability by a vari- ety of judge-made legal doctrines. As it turns out, judicial immunity
was granted to judges by judges. It protects them from being sued for their judicial actions. Inherited from English common
law, it has survived several U.S. court- room challenges. Because judges enjoy immunity
with few exceptions, they can render reckless — even lawless — decisions without consequences. In Stump v. Sparkman, a landmark ruling of modern-
STUMP
day judicial immunity, Indiana Judge Harold Stump ordered the surgical sterilization of 15-year-old Linda Sparkman simply because her parents asked for it. There was no trial or evidentiary hearing. The teenager
was told she was going to have a routine appendectomy. Sparkman sued Stump as an adult after she got married
COLEMAN/PAUL A. LOMBARDO
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100
