Radical Judicial Activists On The Bench Stab Troops In Back!

In a closely watched case involving the confluence of justice, politics and money, the Supreme Court ruled for the first time that the Constitution can require an elected judge to step aside in a particular case based on campaign spending in state judicial races.

In a 5-to-4 decision released on Monday, the high court found that the circumstances surrounding Justice Brent D. Benjamin of the West Virginia Supreme Court and a lawsuit involving the Massey Energy Company, his major campaign contributor, were so “extreme” that there was no question that Justice Benjamin should have disqualified himself.

Because 39 states have legal systems in which judges are elected, the outcome of the West Virginia case has been eagerly awaited. But whether Monday’s decision will bring clarity or chaos to the state courts, or something in between, was a point of bitter disagreement between the high court’s majority and dissenters.
...
The Campaign Legal Center, which describes itself as a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization working in the areas of campaign finance and elections, political communication and government ethics, called Monday’s decision “a welcome result for anyone interested in ensuring the fairness and integrity of the judicial decision-making process.”

“It is surprising that four justices could muster a dissent given the particularly appalling set of circumstances that gave rise to this case,” the center said in a statement.
[ cf Justices Tell Elected Judges Not to Rule on Major Backers ]