Search results

Since April, the state Supreme Court rolled a large screen television into its San Francisco courtroom to conduct oral arguments.

KRON4 journalist Pam Moore takes a look at the Chief Justice's tenure leading California's judicial branch.

A state Supreme Court committee issued an advisory opinion explaining when a judge may accept campaign contributions from a political action committee when the contribution includes funds from another political action committee organized and funded by court employees.

Supreme Court committee issues expedited guidance about a judge serving as a member of a governmental task force with a broad agenda.

The Supreme Court of California will begin live webcasting of its early-May three-day oral argument calendar session in San Francisco, beginning May 3. The decision to webcast the court's oral argument calendar sessions was announced by Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye in her 2016 State of the Judiciary Address to a joint session of the California Legislature in March.

Can a presiding judge disqualify an entire bench? The answer is a decisive “no”, according to the Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions, the ethical rule is that no judge may decide if another judge is disqualified. But they also gave...

A California Supreme Court committee today published guidance for judges who want to attend public demonstrations and rallies, citing a slate of ethical issues for judges to consider before participating.

The Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions (CJEO) this month posted a summary of oral advice stating appellate justices should disqualify themselves from a case if they were removed by peremptory challenge while hearing the case as a trial judge.

A judge can only be reimbursed for expenses incurred during official duties under policies, procedures, and rates approved by the Judicial Council.

Webcasts of the court’s oral arguments have been accessed more than 44,000 times since it began streaming them last year.

Oral advice issued to a presiding justice seeking to solicit campaign endorsements on behalf of other justices facing retention elections.

The Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions (CJEO) advised that an appellate court justice cannot contact a superior court presiding judge regarding misconduct by a superior court research attorney related to a pending appellate matter.