In the current climate of public debate, hostility aimed at judges has surged to an unsettling degree. Lawyers, as part of their professional responsibility, are called to address this safety gap and stand with judges whom they interact with routinely in their line of work. This underscores the notion that, in efforts to defuse attacks against judges and their rulings, the legal profession bears a moral and professional obligation. This responsibility is not solely confined to the confines of the legislative branch, but extends to all members of the legal community.
This perspective was articulated by Deborah Winokur at Cozen O’Connor, who believes that every lawyer has an imperative duty to protect the judiciary from public assault. Notably, this duty goes beyond mere professional ethics – it is an obligation that arises from the very fundamental principles of judicial independence and fair adjudication of cases. An attack on judges is not merely an attack on individuals, but on the rule of law itself.
In her discussion of the issue on Law360, Winokur also looked into the repercussions of these threats and attacks on the judiciary. The undermining of judges and their rulings can lead to a loss of public confidence in the judiciary, which forms the bedrock of democracy in the U.S.
Considering that the Constitution of the United States vests the judicial power solely in the Supreme Court and in such inferior courts as the Congress may establish, lawyers, more than any other professionals have a direct stake in the stability and integrity of the judiciary. This duty to protect the judiciary is therefore, not only an ethical duty, but also a constitutional imperative for attorneys.