By Alethia Kasben
Gongwer News Service
A follow-up report on the Judicial Tenure Commission process found differences in outcomes between white and Black judges but determined there was no evidence of explicit discriminatory practices and couldn't pinpoint a cause.
The National Center for State Courts released the second part of its review of the JTC process early this month. The State Court Administrative Office released the report publicly and said it looked forward to hearing feedback.
A spokesperson for JTC said the commission had not yet reviewed the report.
The review came after the Association of Black Judges of Michigan asked for an independent audit of the JTC process. The group said although just 16% of Michigan's judges are Black, the number of prosecutions from the JTC against Black judges since 2020 was 80% .
The initial report, released last year, found racial disparities at three points of the JTC process: Black judicial officers had a significantly higher number of grievances on average than white judicial officers, grievances against Black judicial officers were more likely to proceed to full investigation than those against white judicial officers, and Black judicial officers were more likely than white judicial officers to have a grievance disposed by public censure.
During the second part of the study, researchers sought to build upon the solely quantitative nature of Phase I by following a mixed methods design, using both qualitative and quantitative approaches.
The qualitative portion of the study involved recruitment and interviews of stakeholders involved in the grievance process, including JTC staff attorneys, JTC commissioners, judicial ethics practitioners, and judges who experienced the JTC process.
"While nothing in the qualitative or quantitative analysis suggests explicit discriminatory practices by the JTC, the apparent lack of standardized definitions, criteria and processes contributes to real or perceived unfair treatment based on race," the study said.
Overall, the study said the process is working differently, and leading to different outcomes, in some situations for Black and white respondents. These include cases that move to full investigations were more likely to end in a public outcome rather than dismissal for Black judges.
Researchers also focused on the process itself and the ways the different stakeholders understood and interpreted the fairness of the process.
"Due to the nature of the JTC grievance process, there were diverging perceptions," the study said. "Largely, JTC staff and commissioners believed that they were careful to prevent bias in the process, while some respondent judges and attorneys for respondent judges articulated instances where they did not feel that the process was fair for Black judges."
The report said it is worth considering how biases may play a role in the JTC process and said the information compiled could be a starting point for more consistent reviews of the process.
Gongwer News Service
A follow-up report on the Judicial Tenure Commission process found differences in outcomes between white and Black judges but determined there was no evidence of explicit discriminatory practices and couldn't pinpoint a cause.
The National Center for State Courts released the second part of its review of the JTC process early this month. The State Court Administrative Office released the report publicly and said it looked forward to hearing feedback.
A spokesperson for JTC said the commission had not yet reviewed the report.
The review came after the Association of Black Judges of Michigan asked for an independent audit of the JTC process. The group said although just 16% of Michigan's judges are Black, the number of prosecutions from the JTC against Black judges since 2020 was 80% .
The initial report, released last year, found racial disparities at three points of the JTC process: Black judicial officers had a significantly higher number of grievances on average than white judicial officers, grievances against Black judicial officers were more likely to proceed to full investigation than those against white judicial officers, and Black judicial officers were more likely than white judicial officers to have a grievance disposed by public censure.
During the second part of the study, researchers sought to build upon the solely quantitative nature of Phase I by following a mixed methods design, using both qualitative and quantitative approaches.
The qualitative portion of the study involved recruitment and interviews of stakeholders involved in the grievance process, including JTC staff attorneys, JTC commissioners, judicial ethics practitioners, and judges who experienced the JTC process.
"While nothing in the qualitative or quantitative analysis suggests explicit discriminatory practices by the JTC, the apparent lack of standardized definitions, criteria and processes contributes to real or perceived unfair treatment based on race," the study said.
Overall, the study said the process is working differently, and leading to different outcomes, in some situations for Black and white respondents. These include cases that move to full investigations were more likely to end in a public outcome rather than dismissal for Black judges.
Researchers also focused on the process itself and the ways the different stakeholders understood and interpreted the fairness of the process.
"Due to the nature of the JTC grievance process, there were diverging perceptions," the study said. "Largely, JTC staff and commissioners believed that they were careful to prevent bias in the process, while some respondent judges and attorneys for respondent judges articulated instances where they did not feel that the process was fair for Black judges."
The report said it is worth considering how biases may play a role in the JTC process and said the information compiled could be a starting point for more consistent reviews of the process.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
