Oh, Hecht!

In a typical “take-out-the-trash Friday,” the fact that Nathan Hecht was cleared of violating the Texas Canon of Judicial Conduct on Friday kind of missed last week’s blogcycle. (Yes, if you can have a “news cycle,” then we can have a “blogcycle.”)

As I had assumed, all three judges came to the conclusion that the state’s canon are unconstitutional. However, only the two Republican lapdogs on the panel, Kerry FitzGerald and Amos Mazzant (the latter of whom had never actually argued an appellate case before Perry appointed him to the appellate bench in 2004) seemed to just think everything  was hunkey dorey:

In the court’s ruling, Justices Kerry FitzGerald and Amos Mazzant of the Dallas appeals court, along with Ann McClure of the El Paso appeals court, agreed that Hecht’s sanction should be lifted. But the three-member special court of review didn’t necessarily fault the commission for taking action against Hecht, saying the state’s judicial conduct code lacks clarity and should be revisited.

“There is no bright line of demarcation between acceptable and prohibited conduct,” Fitzgerald and Mazzant wrote in the majority opinion. “Perhaps an event such as the case before us will precipitate in a fresh approach and renewed efforts” to clean up the rules.

While McClure agreed that the sanction against Hecht should be lifted, she disagrees with many of the majority opinion’s findings. In a concurring opinion that often reads more like a dissent, she said Hecht not only violated the canons, but did so willfully. But because she believes that the canons are unconstitutional, McClure agrees with the judgment.

And although McClure said Hecht’s First Amendment rights had been violated, she doesn’t necessarily agree with his actions. During interviews with the media and others, Hecht did more than just talk about Miers’ qualifications when he said Miers would be a “good justice” and a “conservative judge,” she wrote. He also talked about her religious background, even describing her as “pro-life.”

“Our ability to speak does not mean that we should speak,” McClure said, italicizing words for emphasis in her opinion.

I frequently italicize words in my opinions for emphasis as well. I’m glad I’m not alone in that. Aside from that, however, where do we go from here?  I suspect we’ll see a major move to rewrite the canon this spring. For good measure, they’ll probably slap a picture of Jesus on the cover, an aborted fetus on the back page and a picture of Harrier Miers and George Bush looking fondly into each other’s eyes somewhere in the middle, just for giggles.