If you give a test and, out of your 51 students, 42 of them flunk the test, is there a problem with the students or the test?

A recent report by the Center for Public Integrity created just that dilemma. The study gave an “F” to 42 of the 50 states and the District of Columbia.  The report found that judges in three states — Montana, Utah and Idaho — are not required to file any disclosure reports at all.  And, the Center’s report found 35 examples of questionable gifts, investments overlapping with caseloads as well as other entanglements.

California’s financial disclosure requirements for its judges are among the strongest in the nation.  The state even posts online the reports about judges’ income and investments — a level of transparency that almost every other state refuses to meet.  Yet California did not receive an “A.”

While it might be easy for judicial leaders to conclude the problem is with the test, a more thoughtful response might be appropriate.  Public trust in the judiciary is imperative.

Reflection, then, can start with reading a detailed, new report by the Center for Public Integrity on judicial financial disclosure.