It is easy to think about Judge Pauline Newman’s ongoing shadow impeachment as a one-off event. In many ways it is — thankfully, there is no long string of courts fabricating heart attacks and diminished brain capacity claims to boot a colleague off the court — but if it can happen to one high-profile federal judge, what prevents it from happening to the next? Judges are generally left to police themselves, but the glaring due process issues that rose from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s treatment of Newman could use the Supreme Court stepping in. Hoping for clarity on the process judges should be able to rely on if their colleagues decide on their early retirement despite good behavior, law clerks and judges wrote to the Supreme Court. Law.com has coverage:
Former law clerks and retired judges have urged the U.S. Supreme Court to review U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judge Pauline Newman’s failed, long-running challenge to her suspension over mental fitness concerns.
Newman’s former clerks and the colleagues on the bench submitted amicus briefs asking the justices to reconsider a D.C. Circuit’s ruling from last year that the 98-year-old could not challenge her indefinite suspension as unconstitutional in court.
“Amici are concerned that permitting misconduct of the sort alleged here to proceed unchecked and unexamined by the federal courts poses a grave threat to the independence of all federal judges, particularly the 50% of judges who are 68 or older,” the brief, submitted by Virginia attorney Richard A. Samp, contends.
One quirk of being a federal judge is that they are not protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act. If that were the case, things may have centered on what accommodations, if any, Newman would have needed to continue doing her job. It doesn’t seem like said accommodations would have been substantial — the Supreme Court affirmed one of her dissents during her apparent mental illness problems. As things are, the number of judges leaving because of the disability path seems to be growing:
The retired judges also sounded a broader alarm about judicial independence, warning that misconduct complaints under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act have become “an increasingly common method” by which a judge’s antagonists can “circumvent the constitutionally prescribed impeachment process.”
Judges could really use some guidance. Limbo isn’t a great place to be left in. Dissents have taken a noticeable drop since Newman’s shadow impeachment. While there’s no clear causality, it is an open question if the drop in dissenting is because the realization that you could be kicked for stepping out of line has chilled judges from sharing their opinions.
‘Grave Threat’: Ex-Clerks, Judges Urge Supreme Court to Review Newman’s Suspension [Law.com]
Earlier: Federal Circuit Dissents Plummet After Pauline Newman’s Ersatz Impeachment
Chris Williams became a social media manager and assistant editor for Above the Law in June 2021. Prior to joining the staff, he moonlighted as a minor Memelord™ in the Facebook group Law School Memes for Edgy T14s . He endured Missouri long enough to graduate from Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. He is a former boat builder who is learning to swim and is interested in rhetoric, Spinozists and humor. Getting back in to cycling wouldn’t hurt either. You can reach him by email at christopherrashadwilliams@gmail.com and by Tweet/Bluesky at @WritesForRent.
The post Judges And Former Clerks Encourage SCOTUS To Hear Judge Pauline Newman’s Case appeared first on Above the Law.
It is easy to think about Judge Pauline Newman’s ongoing shadow impeachment as a one-off event. In many ways it is — thankfully, there is no long string of courts fabricating heart attacks and diminished brain capacity claims to boot a colleague off the court — but if it can happen to one high-profile federal judge, what prevents it from happening to the next? Judges are generally left to police themselves, but the glaring due process issues that rose from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s treatment of Newman could use the Supreme Court stepping in. Hoping for clarity on the process judges should be able to rely on if their colleagues decide on their early retirement despite good behavior, law clerks and judges wrote to the Supreme Court. Law.com has coverage:
Former law clerks and retired judges have urged the U.S. Supreme Court to review U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judge Pauline Newman’s failed, long-running challenge to her suspension over mental fitness concerns.
Newman’s former clerks and the colleagues on the bench submitted amicus briefs asking the justices to reconsider a D.C. Circuit’s ruling from last year that the 98-year-old could not challenge her indefinite suspension as unconstitutional in court.
“Amici are concerned that permitting misconduct of the sort alleged here to proceed unchecked and unexamined by the federal courts poses a grave threat to the independence of all federal judges, particularly the 50% of judges who are 68 or older,” the brief, submitted by Virginia attorney Richard A. Samp, contends.
One quirk of being a federal judge is that they are not protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act. If that were the case, things may have centered on what accommodations, if any, Newman would have needed to continue doing her job. It doesn’t seem like said accommodations would have been substantial — the Supreme Court affirmed one of her dissents during her apparent mental illness problems. As things are, the number of judges leaving because of the disability path seems to be growing:
The retired judges also sounded a broader alarm about judicial independence, warning that misconduct complaints under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act have become “an increasingly common method” by which a judge’s antagonists can “circumvent the constitutionally prescribed impeachment process.”
Judges could really use some guidance. Limbo isn’t a great place to be left in. Dissents have taken a noticeable drop since Newman’s shadow impeachment. While there’s no clear causality, it is an open question if the drop in dissenting is because the realization that you could be kicked for stepping out of line has chilled judges from sharing their opinions.
‘Grave Threat’: Ex-Clerks, Judges Urge Supreme Court to Review Newman’s Suspension [Law.com]
Earlier: Federal Circuit Dissents Plummet After Pauline Newman’s Ersatz Impeachment
Chris Williams became a social media manager and assistant editor for Above the Law in June 2021. Prior to joining the staff, he moonlighted as a minor Memelord™ in the Facebook group Law School Memes for Edgy T14s . He endured Missouri long enough to graduate from Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. He is a former boat builder who is learning to swim and is interested in rhetoric, Spinozists and humor. Getting back in to cycling wouldn’t hurt either. You can reach him by email at christopherrashadwilliams@gmail.com and by Tweet/Bluesky at @WritesForRent.
The post Judges And Former Clerks Encourage SCOTUS To Hear Judge Pauline Newman’s Case appeared first on Above the Law.
