The judiciary is held to a high standard of conduct to ensure public trust in the justice system. When a judge’s actions fall short of these standards, it is the role of an independent body to investigate and, if necessary, administer discipline. Such was the case with Thomas F. Rathbun, Jr., a Justice of the Salisbury Town Court in New York, who was recently removed from his position following a formal determination by the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct.
This post provides a factual overview of the findings and the process that led to Judge Rathbun’s removal, based on the public record and the Commission’s official determination.
The Role of the Commission on Judicial Conduct
The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct is a constitutionally established body with the authority to investigate complaints of judicial misconduct and, where warranted, impose discipline. This can range from a confidential letter of caution to public censure, or in the most serious cases, removal from office. The Commission’s purpose is to maintain the integrity and impartiality of the state’s judiciary.
A Pattern of Misconduct: The Charges Against Judge Rathbun
The Commission’s formal complaint against Judge Rathbun contained multiple charges, which collectively painted a picture of a judge who had failed in a wide range of his judicial and ethical duties. The key charges included:
Failure to Meet Mandatory Education Requirements: As a non-lawyer justice, Rathbun was required to complete a certain number of Continuing Judicial Education (CJE) credits each year. The Commission found that he failed to complete these mandatory credits for the year 2022, and subsequently for 2023, despite receiving multiple notices. This failure led to him being prohibited from performing his judicial duties since March 2023.
Serious Administrative Failures: The Commission found that Rathbun failed to report or remit court funds to the Office of the State Comptroller in a timely manner. His failure to file these required monthly reports resulted in his judicial salary being stopped in May 2023. Additionally, he was cited for failing to adjudicate a residential eviction case for an extensive period of eleven months.
Inappropriate and Controversial Displays: This was one of the more publicized aspects of the case. The Commission determined that Judge Rathbun displayed a statue featuring a Confederate flag on his desk in his chambers. When his office door was open, the statue was visible from the courtroom. The Commission stated this display undermined the integrity of the judiciary and created at least the appearance of racial bias.
Improper Political and Partisan Activity: Judge Rathbun was found to have posted inappropriate, partisan, and political content on his public Facebook page. This included demeaning political memes and other content that the Commission viewed as highly inappropriate for a judicial officer, as judges are required to maintain the appearance of impartiality and avoid public expressions of political bias.
Lack of Cooperation with the Investigation: A significant factor in the Commission’s final determination was Rathbun’s complete lack of cooperation. He failed to respond to the Commission’s inquiries, did not file a formal answer to the charges, and did not appear for oral argument on the issue of his sanction.
The Commission’s Determination and Outcome
Due to Judge Rathbun’s failure to respond, the Commission granted a motion for summary determination, finding all factual allegations to be sustained. The Commission’s decision to remove him from office was a unanimous one, with all eleven members concurring.
In its official determination, the Commission stated that the wide-ranging nature of Judge Rathbun’s misconduct, combined with his disregard for the disciplinary process, demonstrated a fundamental lack of respect for his ethical responsibilities. The decision was not based on a single act but on the cumulative effect of his multiple failures and inappropriate actions. The matter was then transmitted to the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals, as required by law, leading to his formal removal from the bench.
The removal of Justice Thomas F. Rathbun, Jr. serves as a clear reminder of the strict ethical and professional standards to which members of the judiciary are held in New York State.
Want more legal ethics breakdown like this?
Subscribe to our blog or follow us for weekly case summaries, rule analyses, and disciplinary updates