First Amendment Coalition v. Judicial Inquiry and Review Bd.

Decision Date27 May 1983
PartiesThe FIRST AMENDMENT COALITION, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and the Philadelphia Inquirer, Petitioners, v. JUDICIAL INQUIRY AND REVIEW BOARD.
CourtPennsylvania Supreme Court

Perry Bechtle, Philadelphia, for respondent.

Before ROBERTS, C.J., and NIX, FLAHERTY, HUTCHINSON and ZAPPALA, JJ.

OPINION OF THE COURT

ZAPPALA, Justice.

Petitioners, the First Amendment Coalition and Coalition members, the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, request that this Court issue a writ of mandamus compelling Respondent Judicial Inquiry and Review Board to file with this Court as a public document the record of its investigation of charges against a member of the judiciary of this Commonwealth. As the Board, a constitutionally independent body, has made no recommendation to this Court of suspension, removal, discipline, or compulsory retirement in this matter, this Court is prohibited by Article V, section 18 of the Pennsylvania Constitution from granting Petitioners' request. Accordingly, the petition is denied.

The present action was brought on Friday, May 6, 1983. On Wednesday, May 11, the Board filed a motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that there is no constitutional basis for the filing of the record in a case where the Board has made no recommendation of action, and on the further ground that Petitioner Philadelphia Inquirer had, on Sunday, May 8, 1983, stated in an editorial that it had obtained a full transcript of the proceedings and had begun to publish extensive verbatim excerpts of the transcript. In their answer to the motion to dismiss, Petitioners acknowledged the publication of portions of the transcript by Petitioner Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News, another member of Petitioner First Amendment Coalition, but alleged that the transcript was not available to the public or to the other members of the First Amendment Coalition. According to Petitioners, "[o]ther members of the Coalition may, if the transcripts were available, publish them verbatim. Others reviewing the transcripts may find that portions unpublished to date are worthy of public notice."

The Judicial Inquiry and Review Board was created in 1968 with the adoption by the citizens of this Commonwealth of present Article V, section 18 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. Pursuant to subsection (a) of section 18, the Board consists of nine members: three judges from different judicial districts of the court of common pleas and two judges of the Superior Court, who are appointed by the Supreme Court; and two lawyer and two non-lawyer members, who are appointed by the Governor. Pursuant to subsection (b), the members serve for a single term of four years and elect a chairman annually. Members may be removed by their respective appointing authorities only for cause.

Subsection (e) directs the Board to receive complaints and reports, formal or informal, pertaining to matters relating to the suspension, removal, discipline, or compulsory retirement of justices or judges, and to make such preliminary investigations as the Board deems necessary. Should the Board determine that the complaint or report warrants further investigation it may order a hearing pursuant to subsection (f), after which, if it "finds good cause therefor," the Board is directed by subsection (g) to "recommend to the Supreme Court the suspension, removal, discipline or compulsory retirement of the justice or judge."

Pursuant to subsection (h), upon receipt of such a recommendation, the Supreme Court "shall review the record of the board's proceedings on the law and facts and may permit the introduction of additional evidence. It shall order suspension, removal, discipline, or compulsory retirement, or wholly reject the recommendation, as it finds just and proper.... All papers filed with and proceedings before the board shall be confidential but upon being filed by the board in the Supreme Court, the record shall lose its confidential character."

From the foregoing provisions, it is clear that the Judicial Inquiry and Review Board was created to act as a constitutionally independent body. This Court is authorized to appoint some of the Board's members and to remove those same appointees for cause, but unless and until the Board "recommend[s] the suspension, removal, discipline...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • In re Bruno
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • August 28, 2014
    ...re Subpoena on Jud. Inquiry & Rev. Bd., 512 Pa. 496, 517 A.2d 949, 952 (1986) (“JIRB Subpoena ”); First Amendment Coalition v. Jud. Inquiry & Rev. Bd., 501 Pa. 129, 460 A.2d 722, 724 (1983) ; Journal of the Pa. Const. Convention, Vol. I, No. 44, at 835 (Feb. 15, 1968)); see also Bruno Brief......
  • In re Magisterial Dist. Judge Mark A. Bruno, J-59 A-2013
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • October 1, 2014
    ...(citing In re Subpoena on Jud. Inquiry & Rev. Bd., 517 A.2d 949, 952 (Pa. 1986) ("JIRB Subpoena"); First Amendment Coalition v. Jud. Inquiry & Rev. Bd., 460 A.2d 722, 724(Pa. 1983); JOURNAL OF THE PA. CONST. CONVENTION, Vol. I, No. 44, at 835 (Feb. 15, 1968)); see also Bruno Brief at 22-26.......
  • Subpoena on Judicial Inquiry and Review Bd., In re
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • June 7, 1983
    ...for this Court to review the record and act. The matter is constitutionally closed. First Amendment Coalition v. Judicial Inquiry and Review Board, 501 Pa. 129, 132-33, 460 A.2d 722, 724 (1983) (emphasis added). It is true that the First Amendment Coalition case and the companion case In th......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT