Unmuzzle the judges

Here’s an idea: Let judges talk to the public!

Judges are often the center of controversy. And, yet, in Massachusetts they are rarely allowed to speak publicly, as strict ethical rules usually bar public comment.

A newly released report, however, could help change that. It may not completely lift the “gag order” that binds sitting judges, but it’s a good start.

The report finds that current rules do “not provide sufficient guidance to judges” with regard to when they can make public statements.

As such, the new proposal would specifically state that a judge can issue a “written memorandum” explaining the reasons for his or her judicial actions “at any time.”

The rule would at least send a message to judges that providing more information to the public can be a good thing.

Judges do not operate in a vacuum. Responding to criticism and concerns are an important part of being a public servant. Indeed, when a controversy erupts, why does a judge not have at least some measure of responsibility to explain his actions?

Consider the way in which media storms surround judges. Nothing irritates a reporter more than when a public official involved in controversy refuses to comment. Critical stories follow, with judges usually sitting by in silence.

A public comment filed by a judge, even in the form of a formal document, should help alleviate this tension.

Inevitably, judges will be careful with the “memo option” and use it sparingly. And this rule will not be a panacea for unseemly media blitzes. The courts still have a lot of work to do in delivering information and delivering it quickly, and they need to be far more aggressive in dealing with the press when a judge is under fire.

But this rule at least will allow a judge a way to explain the concepts at work in a case instead of being completely muzzled. It’s a good step that might just save the reputations of a few judges and educate the public along the way. {EXA}