CONFLICT WITH LEGISLATION

As amended through June 26, 2024
CONFLICT WITH LEGISLATION

In the event of conflict between the provisions of this Code and any statutes covering the same subject matter, activities, or reports, the terms of this Code shall prevail.

Amended effective 1/19/2010.

COMMENT

[1] Part VI specifically applies to A.B. 190, 1991 Nev. Stat., ch. 517, at 517, amending NRS Chapter 281 as it applies to ethics in government, which amendments shall have no application to the judicial branch of government, and S.B. 166 §§ 2, 3, and 4, 1991 Nev. Stat., ch. 585, at 1922-24, amending NRS Chapter 294A. which shall also have no application to the judiciary. This provision of the Code recognizes and reaffirms the principles provided by the Nevada Constitution (Art. 3. § 1) and various case decisions, including Halverson v. Hardcastle, 123 Nev. 245,163 P3d 428 (2007), and Dunphy v. Sheehan, 92 Nev. 259, 549 P2d 332 (1976), wherein the Nevada Supreme Court declared:

The doctrine of separation of powers is fundamental to our system of government. Galloway v. Truesdell, 83 Nev. 13, 422 P2d 237 (1967). The judicial department may not invade the legislative and executive province. State v. District Court, 85 Nev. 485,457 P.2d 217 (1969). Neither may the legislative and executive branches of government exercise powers properly belonging to the judicial department. Graves v. State, 82 Nev. 137, 413 P2d 503 (1966). Out of deference to the doctrine of separation of powers, the Legislature specifically excluded members of the judiciary from the Ethics in Government Law. Such exclusion was constitutionally mandated. In re Kading, 235 N.W.2d 409 (Wis. 1975).

The function of the judicial department is the administration of justice. The judiciary, as a coequal branch of government, possesses the inherent power to protect itself and to administer its affairs. Sun Realty v. District Court, 91 Nev. 774, 542 P.2d 1072 (1975). The promulgation of a Code of Judicial Ethics is a measure essential to the due administration of justice and within the inherent power of the judicial department of this State. In re Kading, supra.

Id. at 265-66, 549 P.2d at 336-37. It is noted, however, that the judicial branch of government is under strong constraints to maintain the highest level of ethical conduct. In that regard, it is emphasized that this Code incorporates higher and more stringent standards of conduct than the referenced legislation would have imposed if it had been deemed applicable to the judiciary. Although violations of the areas addressed by the referenced legislation and superseded as to the judiciary by this Code are not criminal misdemeanors under the Code, as they are in the statutes, violations of this Code are cognizable by the constitutionally empowered Commission on Judicial Discipline. The Commission on Judicial Discipline has the power to censure, retire, or remove all sitting judges, including senior orpart-time judges.