""Allowing judges to be disciplined based on the perceived 'tone' or 'volume' of lawful speech promotes arbitrary enforcement, invites political interference in the judicial branch, and threatens to undermine the rule of law.""
""This case presents an urgent opportunity for the court to restore constitutional clarity and reestablish the First Amendment's protection of the rights of sitting judges to speak on matters of public concern.""
Mark B. Cohen, a former Pennsylvania judge, has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court after being suspended and losing his pension due to 66 Facebook posts deemed partisan. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld the sanctions, applying a balancing test from a 1968 ruling. Cohen's petition argues that the enforcement of speech restrictions based on perceived tone and volume is arbitrary and invites political interference. The case seeks to clarify the constitutional protections for judges' speech and whether strict scrutiny applies to such limitations.
Read at ABA Journal
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]