This week, the judge in the federal discrimination case in which the local Boy Scouts chapter is suing the city publicly disclosed that he had been a Scouting official in the early 1980s, just after he was appointed to the Court of Common Pleas.
Judge Ronald Buckwalter’s disclosure, which he had reportedly revealed to the parties in the case at the beginning of the trial, and the attorney’s response are distressing on several levels.
In Monday’s hearing, the judge said he’d been on the board of the Pennsylvania Dutch Scouts Council, but had gotten off the board after he was elected to the Court of Common Pleas.
According to the Federal Judicial Center, Buckwalter was a Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas judge from 1980-90, meaning he was likely elected in November 1979.
According to the Pennsylvania Dutch Scouts Council records, Buckwalter served on the board from July 1980-July 1984, clearly after he was sworn onto the bench. And he was reelected to the board three more times — not exactly demonstrating initiative to end his tenure there.
The fact that the judge was an official for the group raises questions about his ability to decide the case “fairly, impartially and diligently,” as required by the Code of Conduct for United States Judges.
Scout council board members lead the local organizations in terms of policy, membership and financial management — and are expected to contribute to the organization financially.
The judicial code of conduct specifically states that a judge should not act as a fundraiser for a nonprofit group, nor solicit membership.
While it’s unclear if Buckwalter actually solicited funds or membership, it would be unlikely that he didn’t.
Beyond efforts to ensure an impartial judiciary and public confidence, the code of conduct also works to prevent the appearance of impartiality.
“Deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends on public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges. The integrity and independence of judges depend in turn on their acting without fear or favor … Adherence to this responsibility helps to maintain public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary.”
It would be of lesser importance if the judge had himself been a Scout — as one of the city’s lawyers at the hearing admitted he had been — but serving on the board is another matter.
Additionally, some may counter that his association is too far in the past to color his views on the case before him now.
It should be noted that Philadelphia’s gay-rights ordinance took effect in 1982 — in the middle of Buckwalter’s board tenure.
Buckwalter is probably best known for presiding over Vince Fumo’s corruption trial — and for handing down a 55-month sentence after the jury found Fumo guilty on all 137 counts.
Whether Buckwalter can preside over this case in an impartial manner is unclear. But whether he can give the appearance of impartiality is not.