Source: (2014) Catholic University Law Review. 65:589-623.

This Article addresses the intersection between judicial anger and attempts by judicial sanctioning tribunals to correct the behavior with public sanctions. Disciplinary tribunals tend to impose public sanctions as harsh discipline for a judge's egregiously hostile behavior or repeated displays of anger. This Article challenges the notion that public discipline motivates a judge's positive behavioral changes. For some judges, particularly those whose wrongdoing involves anger, this approach is counterproductive, as shame from the publicity of wrongdoing can stigmatize the judge, exacerbating her anger, hostility, and sense of isolation. Organizations involved in regulating judicial behavior9 and legislatures involved in making laws regarding the authority of these organizations should work toward a more deliberate philosophy of judicial corrections. (excerpt)