ABSTRACT
Judicial officers imply that maintaining the boundaries between judicial impartiality and empathy is on-going, never complete and requires constant self-reminding. This chapter addresses how judicial officers frame and perform impartiality in the legal context where emotion experiences and need for emotion work are embedded, but formally disavowed. Judicial officers understand that, while empathy in judicial work can be considered a challenge to impartiality, it has an important, though carefully circumscribed, place in their work. When asked to define impartiality in lay terms, several judicial officers responded by referring to or quoting the judicial oath. Some judicial officers articulate impartiality by referring to legal method. They stress their essential judicial function of applying law to facts and emphasise keeping an open mind while hearing all the evidence. Several interviewees describe their judicial practice as entailing impartiality and empathy, almost as complementary forces requiring careful and persistent monitoring of their boundaries.
