The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Judge Bibas on "Judges Gone Wild"
The federal appellate judge suggests judges should focus less on social media attention, and more on ensuring their opinions are clear, succinct and correct.
In recent remarks before the Harvard Law School chapter of the Federalist Society, Judge Stephanos Bibas of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit lamented the tendency of some judges to be more concerned with authoring quote-worthy and attention-grabbing opinions than in writing clear and succinct opinions that properly apply the law to the case at hand.
A federal appeals court judge on Wednesday argued his judicial peers too often succumb to a "judges gone wild" mentality of writing "show off" opinions that may trend on Twitter but risk alienating the public instead of being persuasive. . . .
[Bibas said] judges should focus more on writing "in way that ordinary citizens can understand,". . . "Citizens don't read many opinions, but when they do, accessibility is crucial," he said. . . .
"For the show off, it seems to be all about the judge's musings, even the judge's ambitions to be noticed," Bibas said. "'Look at me, look at me, I'm so cool.' That is not authoritative. It is even disrespectful."
Judge Bibas also suggested that judges should spend less time on Twitter and other forms of social media.
Asked by a student how judges feel when a big ruling like his election decisions garners them "newfound fame," Bibas said "the kind of cheerleading you get from Twitter is really dangerous," yet some judges seem to seek that attention.
"Try to be on Twitter less than you otherwise would," he said. "Try not to be searching for the feedback or the plaudits or anything else. Just focus on the craft and find as much internal satisfaction in the craft of judging and writing as you can."
I suspect much of this advice could well apply to legal academics too.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I think it applies to just about everyone.
Twitter is great and has a lot of potential for certain things. Used properly, it can make a great old-style breaking news wire, you know, person assassinated, plane crash, forest fire, etc.
I also find it useful to keep abreast of all of the various space missions and probes
In other words, Twitter is a great highly customizable information aggregator, but a proper forum for political opinion or profound legal or other thought? In that few characters?
Hardly.
Why would a judge be on twitter?
For the same reason anyone else would be?
I wondered similarly when as a teen I first saw one of my teachers in the grocery store. And she was wearing blue jeans!
Mr. Blackman comes to mind! Please Mr. Blackman, try to be on VC less than you otherwise would.
Gosh, it's amazing how incapable you are, unable to skip an author you detest, drawn in like a magnet, forced to type an insult.
You remind me of those whites whose blood was so weak that a single drop of Negro blood could contaminate it beyond all reason.
I don't detest Prof. Adler! What are you talking about, a ass.
You detest Prof Blackman. You apparently can't help but read his posts. You drop a comment here about him. What other conclusion is there?
Hey, if you could mute a conspirator, I totally would! You're right, I can't help but have to scroll past his incessant, inane posts, because there's no way to hide them... yet.
Given Prof Adler's final line (at end of blockquote copied below), Randal's comment seems reasonable and on-topic. Because, and of course this is only conjecture, I wonder of whom Prof. Adler may have been speaking? There's certainly no shortage of candidates.