Judge slows political freight train barreling toward KY judicial independence | Opinion
READ MORE
Judge Julie Goodman impeachment
Former Kentucky state Rep. Killian Timoney filed a petition in January to impeach Fayette Circuit Judge Julie Goodman over her handling of six different cases in Lexington. Goodman and her legal team deny any misconduct, and other legal professionals have raised concerns about the possible precedent an impeachment could set.
Expand All
Obviously, the confounding case of Fayette Judge Julie Goodman won’t end with Judge Phillip Shepherd’s voiding of her impeachment on Tuesday.
No doubt, after all the energy put in by Republicans like Rep. Jason Nemes, R-Louisville, and Attorney General Russell Coleman, the impeachment will end up where it always should have: in front of the Kentucky Supreme Court.
But at least Shepherd’s ruling stops this mad momentum to inject some common sense and moderation into the proceedings. As he put it quite plainly:
“The Court finds and declares that the legislative impeachment power does not extend to a Judge’s rulings or court administration unless such conduct involves criminal acts beyond the scope of lawful judicial duties,” Shepherd wrote in his ruling. “To the extent that the removal of a Judge is sought based on her judicial actions, such claims must be adjudicated by the Judicial Conduct Commission and the Kentucky Supreme Court under §121 of the Ky. Constitution.”
Because at the bottom of this whole conundrum — filled with the many, many legitimate controversies over Goodman’s decisions — is the question of why no one has ever turned Judge Goodman into the Judicial Conduct Commission, which is the legal route that should have been chosen from the beginning.
Surely, Commonwealth’s Attorney Kimberly Baird should answer more questions about why she never did so, and instead testified in front of the House Judiciary Committee, which started the impeachment proceedings. In her House testimony, Baird said she had prepared such charges but wasn’t sure she had enough evidence to convince the JCC because of a perceived bias toward protecting judges.
In his ruling, Shepherd sharply questions Baird’s motives.
“Having determined that she was unlikely to obtain Judge Goodman’s removal from the bench in a hearing before the JCC (which is required to follow due process and is subject to Supreme Court review), Ms. Baird opted to cooperate with the legislative impeachment proceedings in which the rules are unclear at best, and in which a political majority asserts the right to control all matters of practice and procedure on partisan political grounds.”
Shepherd points out that the JCC has been “diligent, thorough, and unbiased in regulating the conduct of judges and in removing judges from office for violations of the Supreme Court’s Code of Judicial Conduct.”
As he went on to say, “One can only wonder why Judge Goodman has been singled out for impeachment prior to any adjudication of the charges, or indeed, even any filing of charges against her, with the JCC, when numerous Judges who have been removed from office have not been impeached, and remain eligible to serve in public office.”
Shepherd also questions the actions of Killian Timoney, a former Republican state representative from Jessamine County who first started the petition. He is running again for his seat against current Rep. Adam Moore, D-Lexington. “Mr. Timoney is a former member of the House of Representatives who was narrowly defeated in the last General Election,” Shepherd wrote. “He is now seeking to make a political comeback. His petition is unverified, despite the statutory requirement for verification of such petitions by affidavit KRS 63.030. He is not a resident of Judge Goodman’s district and has not been a litigant in any case before her. It appears from the record that he has no personal knowledge of the facts he alleges in his petition.”
Shepherd noted that Timoney did not testify before the House Special Committee on Impeachment, and Judge Goodman’s counsel has never had the opportunity to confront or cross-examine him. Of course, it would be interesting to hear from Timoney under oath exactly how this process came about.
As many experts have noted, impeaching judges is unusual not only in Kentucky, but across the country, and in the rare cases it happens, it’s due to actual crimes, like bribery.
“Impeaching a judge due to her perceived misguided approach or potentially flawed decisions marks a troubling escalation in the attacks on judicial independence,” wrote University of Kentucky constitutional law professor Joshua Douglas.
Given Republicans also started but dropped an impeachment petition against state Supreme Court Justice Pamela Goodwine over a case involving legislative powers in Jefferson County, it’s hard not to believe this whole case is a politically-motivated attempt to pick off judges the legislative supermajority don’t like.
Shepherd described it as “complete, unreviewable, and unlimited power to remove any Judge ... for any reason that gains the support of 51 members of the House of Representatives and 26 Senators.”
“The legislature has now asserted the power to remove judges and justices from office because it disagrees with their rulings,” he wrote. “Such unchecked and unreviewable power would destroy the system of checks and balances enshrined in the Kentucky Constitution.”
Our democracy is based on that separation of powers, and within the judicial branch, there are many ways to deal with problematic judges, including leaving the matter to the voters. But judges should not feel their decisions must meet muster with the GOP supermajority in Frankfort, or they, too, will be impeached.
This process will continue, but thanks to Judge Shepherd for at least pausing matters before they go too far.
.jpg)