Judicial Legitimacy Overcomes the First Amendment: Kraham V. Lippman

Summary

---

[...] applying the restriction to party leaders and their law firms was necessary because of Chief Judge Kaye's findings that fiduciary appointments were made disproportionately to party leaders and to their law firms, and this restriction was necessary to combat the public perception of impropriety. second, the two-year period following an individual's service to the party was consistent with other similar restrictions in New York and served the government's goal of increasing judicial legitimacy in the eyes of the public.

See the full content of this document

Extract

---

Judicial Legitimacy Overcomes the First Amendment: Kraham V. Lippman

Are regulations meant to protect the public perception of judicial legitimacy justified even when they may restrict an individual's First Amendment rights of political association? That question was the core issue in Kraham v. Uppman, 478 F.3d 502 (2nd Cir. 2007), a Federal Court of Appeals for the second Circuit case stemming from a New York rule on appointmen...

See the full content of this document

---