Abstract:
Conventional wisdom is that candor is an ideal towards which judges should, with a few exceptions, always aspire. In this Article, Idelman argues that judges – especially life-tenured appellate judges – may regularly forego candor under the principles of logic and prudence and still retain their political legitimacy and institutional integrity. After supporting the avoidance of candor, Idelman presents a theory of candor grounded in prudentialism, that judicial decisionmaking may properly rest on political and institutional considerations.