Foreword.

THE SPECIAL SECTION

Every lawyer noticed that this spring's newspapers were full of stories about judicial appointments. I read them with particular interest, however, for my work on this issue of The Journal made me see the appointments controversy in a whole new light.

If the articles in this issue's special section teach us anything, it's that appellate judges must be men and women of integrity, because they police themselves. And the country's faith in its courts will suffer if they blind themselves to the appearance of impropriety. These truths, more than party affiliation or political philosophy, should guide those who choose potential appointees and--where judges are still elected to appellate courts--those who counsel prospective candidates for judicial office.

Recusal is of course not the only place in which judges' actions will influence public perception of the courts, but cases in which recusal becomes an issue are among the most visible. (The headlines cited in Mr. Bashman's and Judge McKeown's articles make this only too clear.) The courts are a mystery to many who end up as parties to cases on appeal, and any hint of judicial self-interest is likely to feed their latent fear that the process can be rigged. Only if our appellate judges continue to recuse when confronted with circumstances suggestive of self-interest will public faith in the appellate courts be preserved.

I do not intend by featuring recusal in this issue to imply that our appellate judges are anything but serious about their responsibilities. On the contrary, I recognize that we have in this country a tradition of respect for judicial decisionmaking based largely on the widespread recognition that one receives in our appellate courts a hearing untainted by the corrupting influences of position, power, and prejudice. Let us hope that the similarly dangerous influences of politics and partisanship will not come to affect either our judges or their decisions on...