Also known as: canons · canonical · canonically · canonist · canonists · canon law
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
A rule prescribing standards of behavior for judges. The rule requires judges to maintain the integrity and independence of the judiciary through personal conduct that avoids disrepute even when the conduct occurs outside official duties.
A rule prescribing standards of behavior for judges. The rule requires judges to maintain the integrity and independence of the judiciary through personal conduct that avoids disrepute even when the conduct occurs outside official duties.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A principle or maxim applied to resolve ambiguity in legal instruments. The principle guides courts in ascertaining the meaning of such instruments by reference to established presumptions about drafter intent.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A principle or maxim applied to resolve ambiguity in legal instruments. The principle guides courts in ascertaining the meaning of such instruments by reference to established presumptions about drafter intent.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Judge Connor Clark was observed purchasing illegal drugs and meeting regularly with known prostitutes and dealers. The state judicial commission initiated removal proceedings. The commission found that Clark's conduct violated the judicial canon requiring judges to uphold the integrity of the office, even though the behavior occurred outside the courtroom and did not affect any pending case.
A judge's use of illegal drugs and association with prostitutes and drug dealers brings the judicial office into disrepute. Such personal behavior violates the canon requiring judges to uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary and can result in suspension or removal.
Supporting sources
Caitlin Crowley was charged by information rather than grand jury indictment. She argued that the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause incorporated the grand jury requirement against the states. The court applied the canon that no part of a constitutional amendment should be treated as superfluous and held that due process did not require grand jury indictment in state proceedings.
Catherine Carter sought to prevent her husband from testifying against her in a criminal trial. She relied on the historical rule that spouses were treated as one person under medieval jurisprudence. The court examined the ancient canons that once supported spousal disqualification and concluded that modern evidence law no longer recognized the privilege in that form.
Carlos Castillo advertised fixed fees for routine legal services. The state bar invoked professional canons that historically regulated lawyer solicitation. The court reviewed those canons and determined that blanket prohibitions on truthful advertising violated constitutional protections for commercial speech.
Christine Castro added state-law claims to a federal diversity action after the amount-in-controversy requirement was met for the original claim. The defendant argued that the supplemental jurisdiction statute should be read narrowly. The court rejected any requirement of extraordinary clarity and applied ordinary principles of statutory construction to determine the statute's reach.
Cody Callahan challenged a state abortion statute by tracing the common-law treatment of pre-quickening abortions. The court reviewed early philosophical and canon-law concepts that influenced when life was considered to begin. Those historical sources informed the constitutional analysis of state regulatory power.
Canons direct that a conveyance be construed against the conveyor when ambiguity exists. They also require that all words in a will be given effect if possible and that an instrument be construed to be lawful whenever feasible.
Supporting sources
Courts invoke the canon when interpreting amendments containing multiple clauses. The canon prevents reading one clause, such as due process, to render another clause, such as the grand jury requirement, meaningless.
Supporting sources
…Noonan 20-26; Quay 426-430; see also J. Noonan, Contraception: A History of Its Treatment by the Catholic Theologians and Canonists 18-29 (1965). [^maj-23]: Bracton took the position that abortion by blow or poison was homicide "if the foetus be already formed and animated, and particularly if it be animated." 2 H.…