Ethics Committee, Referee Ilyssa Cimmino (Oakland) – We are submitting a letter to the Board of Commissioners in which we declined to support the Proposed Amendments of Canon 3 of the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct and Rule 6.5 of the Michigan Rules of Professional conduct.  The committee’s main concern is that while we support professionalism and civility, the proposed amendments created a list of protected categories, and the committee felt the list was unnecessary and eliminates respect and courtesy “for all parties.”   We sent over a language revision that we believed encompassed the intent of the amendments while protecting everyone. 

Further, we are also working on an opinion that states communication between a referee and the judicial officer to whom the referee provides recommended orders is not ex parte communication.  The opinion points out that it is ok to seek the judge’s input or clarification during the drafting process, because it promotes efficiency and accuracy by ensuring that the recommendation reflects the judge’s legal reasoning.  Additionally, because referees are subject to the Judicial Canons, all information received must be handled in accordance with ethical standards.  As long as both parties have access to the same information, it is ok to share any information provided to the judge.  Lastly, the committee believes that referees can also communicate with a judge about any unstated rationale in their recommendations but cautioned referees about making recommendations based upon reasons not stated in a recommended order. 

Finally, we also drafted an opinion on whether a judicial officer may be a member of a fraternal or advocacy organization including the Fraternal Order of Police.  The opinion states that judges are not categorically prohibited from joining, but the judicial officer needs to weigh all factors and ensure that the affiliation does not cast doubt on a judge’s impartiality. 

Ethics Committee, Referee Ilyssa Cimmino (Oakland)- We spent a lot of time at our last meeting discussing the Proposed Amendment of Canon 3, “A Judge should perform the duties of office impartially and diligently” whereby the proposed addition talks about requiring Judges to make “reasonable efforts…to facilitate the ability of all litigants, including self-represented litigants to be fairly heard” and what that really means in day-to-day life for Judges/Referees.  The ethics committee finds the proposed amendment to be pretty vague and so a subcommittee has been created to present a letter to the Board of Commissioners so that we can provide our comments prior to the vote.

Juvenile Justice Partnership Committee, Referee Lisa Harris and Referee Holly Spoelman (Muskegon) – update from Referee Spoelman -     We are going to continue providing JJ trainings into 2025.  The SCAO newsletter formerly known as “Monthly Newsletter” is now going to be known as “Juvenile Court Connection Monthly Newsletter”.  The newsletter will contain Juvenile updates, resources, training opportunities and funding opportunities. The CWJJS website contains the recordings of previous Juvenile Justice webinars. The group reviewed the evaluation results from the last two trainings that were held in 2024.  Both trainings were well received and considered beneficial by the attendees.  The group is continuing to identify and prioritize trainings for 2025. We will be meeting quarterly. Our next meeting is in April 2025.

SBM Judicial Ethics Committee - Referee Ilyssa Cimmino (Oakland)
In the spring, we initiated a Judge training for MJI on Artificial Intelligence and on the JI-155 Artificial Intelligence ethics opinion.  We presented in many counties across the state (I was one of the presenters at the Plymouth training along with Judge Savin).  Prior to that we were working on creating a Judicial Campaign Guidebook with resources and FAQs related to campaigning and following the Cannons.  There were still some revisions that needed to be worked out, so it’s still a work in progress. We are presently discussing the Proposed Amendments to MCJC 4 and 6, which proposes expanded financial disclosure requirements by Judicial Officers.  We are working to advise the Board on whether we support, reject or have any proposed amendments to suggest for consideration. 

SCAO Juvenile Justice Partnership Committee - Referee Lisa Harris (Oakland) and Referee Holly Spoelman (Muskegon) - update from Referee Spoelman  
The committee has been meeting monthly beginning in November, 2023. The committee is comprised of representatives from various agencies, courts and community groups.  Each of the members also participates in one or more workgroups and subgroups.  The workgroups are Training, Data & Quality Assurance, and Policy & Procedure.  The subgroups are Screening & Assessment Tools, Diversion and Consent, and Juvenile Probation and Case Management Standards.  I have been serving on the Training workgroup. The workgroup has been planning and conducting monthly webinars.  The work group reviews and discusses he evaluations and comments the month following each webinar. The recorded webinars as well as “Training in a Minute” videos (prerecorded power points with audio can be accessed on the Child Welfare Juvenile Justice website.  Several of the workgroups and subgroups have completed their initial directives/deliverables and are winding down.  The Training workgroup will continue meeting and planning webinars that will be held throughout the upcoming year. The Training group already has a substantial list of potential training topics. However, if any RAM members have any training topics they would like the Training workgroup to consider, I will be happy to bring those requests to the next Training workgroup meeting.