Inquirer Editorial: Judge needs to take a break
New testimony in the political corruption trial of State Sen. Jane Orie makes it even more obvious that her sister, Justice Joan Orie Melvin, should step down at least temporarily from the state Supreme Court.
New testimony in the political corruption trial of State Sen. Jane Orie makes it even more obvious that her sister, Justice Joan Orie Melvin, should step down at least temporarily from the state Supreme Court.
A former aide to the Republican senator has told an Allegheny County court that Orie and Melvin, fresh from her election to the high court in 2009, jointly ordered the aide to remove materials that might connect the justice-elect to campaign work improperly conducted in Orie's office.
Authorities at that time were zeroing in on the allegedly illegal campaign work, which would result in a raft of criminal charges against Orie and another sister, Janine Orie. The senator's former staff chief, Jamie Pavlot, testified that her boss and Melvin made it clear that, "if there's stuff . . . related to the judge, get it out."
Melvin hasn't been charged with any wrongdoing. In January, however, she was named a target in a grand jury investigation into whether state workers illegally aided her 2003 election bid. The grand jury's action prompted Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts to ask Melvin to step aside temporarily. "Judges and especially Supreme Court justices should not be permitted to judge others while under the cloud of such a serious investigation," said the court-reform group.
The call for Melvin to take a leave, or for the court to order it, was reiterated this week by PMC executive director Lynn A. Marks. Meanwhile, University of Pittsburgh law professor John Burkoff told a local newspaper that Melvin's continuing presence "casts a cloud over all of the court's deliberations."
Neither the justice nor the court has commented on the calls for her recusal, but she has pulled back from hearing any criminal cases from Allegheny County while her sisters face charges. That's proper, but there will be questions hanging over any case in which Melvin participates so long as the cloud of the campaign-work probe remains.
Another way for the court to handle this would be for the state's judicial disciplinary arm to investigate. In fact, a government-reform activist, Gene Stilp, says he's filed three formal complaints against Melvin with the state Judicial Conduct Board.
The latest testimony in the Orie case follows other witness accounts that also appear damaging to Melvin, who was previously a Superior Court judge. One witness said politicking was common "within every judicial office" of then-Superior Court Judge Melvin for more than a decade.
Regardless of the trial's outcome, the allegations of illegal campaign work underscore the problem with electing the state's most powerful judges in partisan contests that require millions in campaign donations. If nothing else, the focus on Melvin and her sisters should jump-start a switch to a merit-based system of appointment for the appellate bench.
