{"id":142900,"date":"2026-01-29T16:54:56","date_gmt":"2026-01-30T00:54:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/01\/29\/second-circuit-judge-accused-of-bullying-her-law-clerks-again\/"},"modified":"2026-01-29T16:54:56","modified_gmt":"2026-01-30T00:54:56","slug":"second-circuit-judge-accused-of-bullying-her-law-clerks-again","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/01\/29\/second-circuit-judge-accused-of-bullying-her-law-clerks-again\/","title":{"rendered":"Second Circuit Judge Accused Of Bullying Her Law Clerks \u2014 Again"},"content":{"rendered":"

On December 18, 2025, The Legal Accountability Project<\/a> (LAP) took a meaningful step toward real<\/em> judicial accountability, filing our first Judicial Conduct and Disability (JC&D) Act complaint<\/a> against Second Circuit Judge Sarah Merriam<\/a>. Disturbingly, this is the second<\/em> misconduct complaint<\/a> against Judge Merriam in fewer than four years. And it\u2019s the first time<\/a> a federal judge has been publicly reprimanded for mistreating clerks, only to engender a second<\/em> misconduct complaint for similar conduct \u2014 flouting both judiciary policy<\/a> and a public disciplinary order<\/a>. With this complaint, LAP circumvents<\/a> both congressional intransigence and judicial branch inaction.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In December 2023, Second Circuit Chief Judge Debra Livingston published a whitewashed disciplinary order<\/a> disposing of the first complaint against Merriam. The laughable remedies delineated in that order \u2014 watching training videos; committing to treating clerks better; checking in with Livingston periodically; and the Director of Workplace Relations<\/a> (DWR) for the circuit \u2014 a clerk point of contact \u2014 would check in with Merriam\u2019s clerks every six months through 2025 \u2014 were toothless. It was literally the least<\/em> the circuit could do.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Immediately thereafter, incoming Merriam clerks asked whether to withdraw from their clerkships. Sadly, since the order misrepresented the clerk\u2019s allegations, cherry-picking to paint them in the worst possible light, incoming clerks were misled to believe the clerkship wouldn\u2019t be that bad and opted to proceed anyway. Big mistake. <\/em>But there\u2019s currently no outside oversight over the judicial complaint process \u2014 Congress has, unsurprisingly, abdicated its oversight responsibility<\/a> over the courts \u2014 and, like most clerk complainants, the clerk did not have a lawyer at all times. So, the circuit misled the public, painting the situation as a personality conflict between judge and clerk rather than the hostile work environment it was.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

Between December 2023 and December 2025, LAP fielded troubling allegations from clerks \u2014 those who endured mistreatment, one who quit after just one month working for Merriam, and several who withdrew from clerkship offers after learning the clerkship\u2019s realities. LAP\u2019s complaint alleges<\/a> Merriam created a hostile and toxic work environment \u2014 nothing like the exemplary workplace the federal judiciary claims to foster. Chambers conditions may have gotten worse<\/em> after the public reprimand. Clerks allege<\/a> Merriam routinely bullied, belittled, isolated, and dehumanized them; yelled at them; and sent unhinged emails in all capital letters. The complaint alleges Merriam\u2019s conduct, including sudden and unpredictable outbursts, is part of an emotional rollercoaster of unpredictable mood swings.<\/p>\n

Importantly, the complaint also alleges Second Circuit clerk points of contact \u2014 the DWR and Circuit Executive \u2014 were aware of ongoing misconduct for at least one year before this second complaint but failed to report this to Chief Judge Livingston and urge her to open a second investigation. Frankly, those who knowingly and willfully conceal information about judicial misconduct are obstructing justice. There is an enormous power disparity, not just between life-tenured federal judges and clerks, but also between clerks and judicial branch officials. Clerks are particularly vulnerable during investigations, because they typically lack legal representation, while going up against the full weight of the federal judiciary and its army of lawyers. Disturbingly, far too little about workplace conduct policies is delineated in writing. That\u2019s by design. It\u2019s ironic, considering how much judges love to expound on process and enforce courtroom rules. Judiciary officials regularly fail to follow their own policies or change the rules midway through: but without transparency around investigations, it can be challenging to allege procedural wrongdoing.\u00a0<\/p>\n

It appears that Livingston likely either knew or should have known<\/em> about ongoing issues in Merriam\u2019s chambers, since she allegedly met with Merriam to discuss workplace conduct, according to the 2023 order<\/a>. And, Livingston supervises the DWR and Circuit Executive, who knew of the misconduct. Circuit-wide willful ignorance by those in positions of power who should know better, is shameful.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

Anyone can file a JCD complaint<\/a> \u2014 including law clerks, litigants, attorneys, and members of the public \u2014 alleging<\/a> a \u201cjudge has engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts.\u201d LAP filed this complaint because we\u2019re able to shoulder the risk that law clerks believe they cannot. Frankly, clerks don\u2019t do their best work when they are being mercilessly bullied \u2014 risking harm to litigants who depend on orders and opinions issued from overworked and demoralized chambers. And it undermines public confidence in the courts when judges\u2019 workplace conduct is so lawless<\/a>, and when judges display such callous disregard for the laws they interpret.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Disturbingly, just two or three<\/em> clerk complaints are filed each year against judges. While the federal judiciary misleadingly claims<\/a> this indicates a lack of misconduct, that\u2019s proven false by the judiciary\u2019s own 2023 <\/em>workplace conduct survey<\/a>, released in March 2025. Those data indicate<\/a> as many as 106 judges<\/em> mistreated their clerks in 2023, yet just three clerk complaints<\/em><\/a> were filed that year.<\/p>\n

Why the discrepancy? Law clerks \u2014 and more than 30,000 federal judiciary employees \u2014 are exempt from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act<\/a> of 1964 and all federal anti-discrimination laws, including legal protection against retaliation for reporting. It\u2019s simple: clerks do not and will not report misconduct until they\u2019re protected against retaliation. The judiciary vociferously opposes extending Title VII protections to the Third Branch, even while Congress extended Title VII to itself<\/a> and the Executive Branch<\/a> in 1995, because exempting clerks from legal protection against retaliation will also<\/em> chill complaints. Judges can and do retaliate against clerks by intervening in their bar applications and by contacting employers to give negative references and blackball them from jobs. (That\u2019s what happened to me<\/a>, following my clerkship with the D.C. U.S. Attorney\u2019s Office four years ago.)\u00a0<\/p>\n

The judicial complaint process is flawed, but it\u2019s the system we have: using <\/em>the system is how we\u2019ll change it. Importantly, since LAP is the named complainant, Merriam\u2019s current and former clerks will be confidential witnesses: they can speak freely with the circuit, without Merriam knowing who said what to whom, better protecting them against retaliation. Troublingly, during lengthy investigations, judges\u2019 clerks are not<\/em> typically reassigned. For example, during the year-long investigation into former Alaska federal judge Joshua Kindred<\/a>, who resigned in July 2024<\/a> amid threat of further discipline<\/a>, after Kindred was credibly accused of sexually harassing clerks, they were forced to continue working under him. So, LAP\u2019s complaint requests that Merriam\u2019s clerks be immediately reassigned to protect them, pending an investigation.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Clerks tell me<\/em> Merriam should not be a judge<\/em>. She cannot manage her chambers or supervise employees. But as long as judges like Merriam remain on the bench, they\u2019ll get clerks<\/a>: someone is desperate enough for the credential, or believes it won\u2019t happen to them. In fact, several Merriam clerks didn\u2019t think this would happen to them; wish they\u2019d listened when warned; and wouldn\u2019t have accepted the clerkship if they knew how bad it would be<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

While federal judges enjoy life tenure \u201cduring good behavior<\/a>\u201d and can therefore only be removed by congressional impeachment, some resign amid threat of further discipline. Kindred did<\/a>. I hope to see the same outcome here.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The judiciary has a harassment problem<\/a> that no one cares to solve. The courts refuse to hold judges accountable for misconduct<\/a>, turn a blind eye<\/a> to known abuses of power, obfuscate and willfully mislead the public<\/a>, and stonewall Congress<\/a>. Blame also lies with presidents of both parties who\u2019ve nominated but failed to properly vet judicial nominees \u2014 appointing them<\/a> with total disregard for who they are as people and managers<\/em>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But while the judiciary is perpetrating a fraud upon the public, Congress \u2014 the branch of government empowered to act \u2014 refuses to act<\/a>. While it\u2019s easy to blame Republicans for everything that\u2019s wrong, <\/em>much responsibility lies with feckless congressional Democrats, who\u2019ve not only abdicated their oversight responsibility over the federal courts but, frankly, do not understand <\/em>what their responsibilities are. Congressional Democrats are obsessed <\/em>with Trump \u2014 to the exclusion of any other issue. It\u2019s ironic to see Democrats on the news demanding \u201caccountability\u201d for government actors who are \u201cabove the law\u201d and calling for \u201ctransparency\u201d \u2014 accountability and transparency, except for the judiciary. <\/em>Democrats failed to prioritize the courts<\/a>: if they had, our judiciary might actually be a trusted<\/em> bulwark against creeping autocracy.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Members and their staff tell me this issue \u201cisn\u2019t in their legislative agenda;\u201d they\u2019re \u201ctoo busy\u201d to send an oversight letter (while sending letters about everything else); and \u201cif it\u2019s not about Trump, we won\u2019t act.\u201d Yet Congress has at least four tools in its toolbox \u2014 oversight, legislation, appropriations, and the bully pulpit \u2014 and none requires them to be in the majority to show some spine right now<\/em>. Congress\u2019s failure to act shields judges like Merriam from accountability and perpetuates judicial branch lawlessness.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Oversight<\/strong><\/p>\n

Any member can direct questions to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO). While members send letters about countless other topics, they have refused to do this, even after I drafted questions for them \u2014 including one member whose constituent was one of just two<\/em> law clerk complainants last year.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The judiciary enjoys an outrageous lack of congressional oversight<\/a>. Since it released its workplace survey<\/a> results in March 2025 \u2014 on the same day<\/em> a judge resigned amid misconduct allegations<\/a>, not a single<\/em> member has asked a single <\/em>question about why as many as 106 judges committed misconduct<\/a> in 2023, yet just three<\/em> clerks<\/a> filed complaints that year. Nor has Congress demanded to know who those judges are and why<\/em> they\u2019re not being investigated.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Democrats could hold a \u201cshadow hearing\u201d (chaired by just Democrats), which they\u2019ve held on several other<\/a> rule of law<\/a> topics. If and when Democrats retake the majority, the House Judiciary Committee \u2014 which has apparently decided judicial branch oversight isn\u2019t in its job description anymore \u2014 should immediately hold hearings. Majority members with subpoena power should demand notes and documents revealing systemic misconduct that the courts may have withheld. And, when Congress calls witnesses, while judiciary leadership will stonewall, underlings like DWRs will have on-the-ground information from conversations with clerks about abusive judges, and an insider\u2019s view of leadership\u2019s obfuscation.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Legislation<\/strong><\/p>\n

Congress should reintroduce the Judiciary Accountability Act<\/a> (JAA), which would finally extend Title VII and whistleblower protections to more than 30,000 exempt law clerks, permanent court staff, and federal public defenders<\/a>. Congress should also reintroduce the Transparency and Responsibility in Upholding Standards in the Judiciary<\/a> (TRUST) Act, which would amend the JCD Act so investigations can continue even if judges step down to evade accountability<\/a>. And, Congress should attach a Title VII amendment to a mandatory spending bill (or to the judiciary\u2019s annual budget request).\u00a0<\/p>\n

Appropriations<\/strong><\/p>\n

Congress controls the purse strings and should use the judiciary\u2019s annual budget request<\/a> as a sword and shield. Congress should at least threaten to zero out the judiciary\u2019s budget until they implement meaningful reforms. And the Appropriations Committee should tie judiciary funding to benchmarks for progress. Last May, AO Director Robert Conrad testified before the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee: workplace conduct was the second item in his written testimony<\/a>. Yet not a single member<\/em> asked <\/em>about workplace conduct. Conrad will be back this spring: Congress should ask tough questions.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Bully Pulpit<\/strong><\/p>\n

Of all the tools at their disposal, this is perhaps members\u2019 greatest untapped power. Congresspeople have huge national platforms to do new interviews, publish op-eds, and utilize social media to raise awareness, spark dialogue, and effect change. Their silence on this topic is shameful.\u00a0<\/p>\n

This year, every House member and many senators run for reelection. Congress believes they don\u2019t have to act, because constituents don\u2019t know the judiciary is exempt from Title VII, don\u2019t believe this affects them, and won\u2019t hold them accountable by demanding action or voting them out of office. Congress doesn\u2019t understand the courts affect all of us<\/em><\/a>. If you\u2019re frustrated about the lack of accountability for judges who abuse their power \u2014 or think it defies logic that the entire federal judiciary, which interprets our laws, is exempt from all workplace anti-discrimination laws \u2014 hold your member accountable or elect someone who will act<\/em>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The judicial complaint process was not crafted with law clerks in mind. Frankly, it\u2019s set up to shield abusive judges from accountability. But for now, it\u2019s the system we have. I hope clerks see LAP\u2019s complaint and are empowered to come forward, because fixing the system from the inside is how we\u2019ll create meaningful change. Someday, the tide will turn: we\u2019ll remember who was on the right side of history when it was hard.\u00a0<\/p>\n

It would be a stain on the judiciary to shield Judge Merriam from accountability under these circumstances, LAP\u2019s complaint concludes. Pressuring the judiciary to act requires all of us<\/em> \u2014 law clerks, law students, lawyers, members of Congress, and the press \u2014 to demand change and shine a light on misconduct that\u2019s historically been hidden. The judiciary has long exploited clerks\u2019 fears and benefitted from clerks\u2019 silence. Let\u2019s not give them that any longer.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n

Aliza Shatzman is the President and Founder of\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>The Legal Accountability Project<\/em><\/strong><\/a>, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not. She regularly writes and speaks about judicial accountability and clerkships. Reach out to her via email at\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>Aliza.Shatzman@legalaccountabilityproject.org<\/em><\/strong><\/a>\u00a0and follow her on Twitter @AlizaShatzman.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

The post Second Circuit Judge Accused Of Bullying Her Law Clerks \u2014 Again<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n

On December 18, 2025, The Legal Accountability Project<\/a> (LAP) took a meaningful step toward real<\/em> judicial accountability, filing our first Judicial Conduct and Disability (JC&D) Act complaint<\/a> against Second Circuit Judge Sarah Merriam<\/a>. Disturbingly, this is the second<\/em> misconduct complaint<\/a> against Judge Merriam in fewer than four years. And it\u2019s the first time<\/a> a federal judge has been publicly reprimanded for mistreating clerks, only to engender a second<\/em> misconduct complaint for similar conduct \u2014 flouting both judiciary policy<\/a> and a public disciplinary order<\/a>. With this complaint, LAP circumvents<\/a> both congressional intransigence and judicial branch inaction.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In December 2023, Second Circuit Chief Judge Debra Livingston published a whitewashed disciplinary order<\/a> disposing of the first complaint against Merriam. The laughable remedies delineated in that order \u2014 watching training videos; committing to treating clerks better; checking in with Livingston periodically; and the Director of Workplace Relations<\/a> (DWR) for the circuit \u2014 a clerk point of contact \u2014 would check in with Merriam\u2019s clerks every six months through 2025 \u2014 were toothless. It was literally the least<\/em> the circuit could do.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Immediately thereafter, incoming Merriam clerks asked whether to withdraw from their clerkships. Sadly, since the order misrepresented the clerk\u2019s allegations, cherry-picking to paint them in the worst possible light, incoming clerks were misled to believe the clerkship wouldn\u2019t be that bad and opted to proceed anyway. Big mistake. <\/em>But there\u2019s currently no outside oversight over the judicial complaint process \u2014 Congress has, unsurprisingly, abdicated its oversight responsibility<\/a> over the courts \u2014 and, like most clerk complainants, the clerk did not have a lawyer at all times. So, the circuit misled the public, painting the situation as a personality conflict between judge and clerk rather than the hostile work environment it was.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

Between December 2023 and December 2025, LAP fielded troubling allegations from clerks \u2014 those who endured mistreatment, one who quit after just one month working for Merriam, and several who withdrew from clerkship offers after learning the clerkship\u2019s realities. LAP\u2019s complaint alleges<\/a> Merriam created a hostile and toxic work environment \u2014 nothing like the exemplary workplace the federal judiciary claims to foster. Chambers conditions may have gotten worse<\/em> after the public reprimand. Clerks allege<\/a> Merriam routinely bullied, belittled, isolated, and dehumanized them; yelled at them; and sent unhinged emails in all capital letters. The complaint alleges Merriam\u2019s conduct, including sudden and unpredictable outbursts, is part of an emotional rollercoaster of unpredictable mood swings.<\/p>\n

Importantly, the complaint also alleges Second Circuit clerk points of contact \u2014 the DWR and Circuit Executive \u2014 were aware of ongoing misconduct for at least one year before this second complaint but failed to report this to Chief Judge Livingston and urge her to open a second investigation. Frankly, those who knowingly and willfully conceal information about judicial misconduct are obstructing justice. There is an enormous power disparity, not just between life-tenured federal judges and clerks, but also between clerks and judicial branch officials. Clerks are particularly vulnerable during investigations, because they typically lack legal representation, while going up against the full weight of the federal judiciary and its army of lawyers. Disturbingly, far too little about workplace conduct policies is delineated in writing. That\u2019s by design. It\u2019s ironic, considering how much judges love to expound on process and enforce courtroom rules. Judiciary officials regularly fail to follow their own policies or change the rules midway through: but without transparency around investigations, it can be challenging to allege procedural wrongdoing.\u00a0<\/p>\n

It appears that Livingston likely either knew or should have known<\/em> about ongoing issues in Merriam\u2019s chambers, since she allegedly met with Merriam to discuss workplace conduct, according to the 2023 order<\/a>. And, Livingston supervises the DWR and Circuit Executive, who knew of the misconduct. Circuit-wide willful ignorance by those in positions of power who should know better, is shameful.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

Anyone can file a JCD complaint<\/a> \u2014 including law clerks, litigants, attorneys, and members of the public \u2014 alleging<\/a> a \u201cjudge has engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts.\u201d LAP filed this complaint because we\u2019re able to shoulder the risk that law clerks believe they cannot. Frankly, clerks don\u2019t do their best work when they are being mercilessly bullied \u2014 risking harm to litigants who depend on orders and opinions issued from overworked and demoralized chambers. And it undermines public confidence in the courts when judges\u2019 workplace conduct is so lawless<\/a>, and when judges display such callous disregard for the laws they interpret.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Disturbingly, just two or three<\/em> clerk complaints are filed each year against judges. While the federal judiciary misleadingly claims<\/a> this indicates a lack of misconduct, that\u2019s proven false by the judiciary\u2019s own 2023 <\/em>workplace conduct survey<\/a>, released in March 2025. Those data indicate<\/a> as many as 106 judges<\/em> mistreated their clerks in 2023, yet just three clerk complaints<\/em><\/a> were filed that year.<\/p>\n

Why the discrepancy? Law clerks \u2014 and more than 30,000 federal judiciary employees \u2014 are exempt from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act<\/a> of 1964 and all federal anti-discrimination laws, including legal protection against retaliation for reporting. It\u2019s simple: clerks do not and will not report misconduct until they\u2019re protected against retaliation. The judiciary vociferously opposes extending Title VII protections to the Third Branch, even while Congress extended Title VII to itself<\/a> and the Executive Branch<\/a> in 1995, because exempting clerks from legal protection against retaliation will also<\/em> chill complaints. Judges can and do retaliate against clerks by intervening in their bar applications and by contacting employers to give negative references and blackball them from jobs. (That\u2019s what happened to me<\/a>, following my clerkship with the D.C. U.S. Attorney\u2019s Office four years ago.)\u00a0<\/p>\n

The judicial complaint process is flawed, but it\u2019s the system we have: using <\/em>the system is how we\u2019ll change it. Importantly, since LAP is the named complainant, Merriam\u2019s current and former clerks will be confidential witnesses: they can speak freely with the circuit, without Merriam knowing who said what to whom, better protecting them against retaliation. Troublingly, during lengthy investigations, judges\u2019 clerks are not<\/em> typically reassigned. For example, during the year-long investigation into former Alaska federal judge Joshua Kindred<\/a>, who resigned in July 2024<\/a> amid threat of further discipline<\/a>, after Kindred was credibly accused of sexually harassing clerks, they were forced to continue working under him. So, LAP\u2019s complaint requests that Merriam\u2019s clerks be immediately reassigned to protect them, pending an investigation.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Clerks tell me<\/em> Merriam should not be a judge<\/em>. She cannot manage her chambers or supervise employees. But as long as judges like Merriam remain on the bench, they\u2019ll get clerks<\/a>: someone is desperate enough for the credential, or believes it won\u2019t happen to them. In fact, several Merriam clerks didn\u2019t think this would happen to them; wish they\u2019d listened when warned; and wouldn\u2019t have accepted the clerkship if they knew how bad it would be<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

While federal judges enjoy life tenure \u201cduring good behavior<\/a>\u201d and can therefore only be removed by congressional impeachment, some resign amid threat of further discipline. Kindred did<\/a>. I hope to see the same outcome here.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The judiciary has a harassment problem<\/a> that no one cares to solve. The courts refuse to hold judges accountable for misconduct<\/a>, turn a blind eye<\/a> to known abuses of power, obfuscate and willfully mislead the public<\/a>, and stonewall Congress<\/a>. Blame also lies with presidents of both parties who\u2019ve nominated but failed to properly vet judicial nominees \u2014 appointing them<\/a> with total disregard for who they are as people and managers<\/em>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But while the judiciary is perpetrating a fraud upon the public, Congress \u2014 the branch of government empowered to act \u2014 refuses to act<\/a>. While it\u2019s easy to blame Republicans for everything that\u2019s wrong,much responsibility lies with feckless congressional Democrats, who\u2019ve not only abdicated their oversight responsibility over the federal courts but, frankly, do not understand <\/em>what their responsibilities are. Congressional Democrats are obsessedwith Trump \u2014 to the exclusion of any other issue. It\u2019s ironic to see Democrats on the news demanding \u201caccountability\u201d for government actors who are \u201cabove the law\u201d and calling for \u201ctransparency\u201d \u2014 accountability and transparency, except for the judiciary. <\/em>Democrats failed to prioritize the courts<\/a>: if they had, our judiciary might actually be a trusted<\/em> bulwark against creeping autocracy.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Members and their staff tell me this issue \u201cisn\u2019t in their legislative agenda;\u201d they\u2019re \u201ctoo busy\u201d to send an oversight letter (while sending letters about everything else); and \u201cif it\u2019s not about Trump, we won\u2019t act.\u201d Yet Congress has at least four tools in its toolbox \u2014 oversight, legislation, appropriations, and the bully pulpit \u2014 and none requires them to be in the majority to show some spine right now<\/em>. Congress\u2019s failure to act shields judges like Merriam from accountability and perpetuates judicial branch lawlessness.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Oversight<\/strong><\/p>\n

Any member can direct questions to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO). While members send letters about countless other topics, they have refused to do this, even after I drafted questions for them \u2014 including one member whose constituent was one of just two<\/em> law clerk complainants last year.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The judiciary enjoys an outrageous lack of congressional oversight<\/a>. Since it released its workplace survey<\/a> results in March 2025 \u2014 on the same day<\/em> a judge resigned amid misconduct allegations<\/a>, not a single<\/em> member has asked a single <\/em>question about why as many as 106 judges committed misconduct<\/a> in 2023, yet just three<\/em> clerks<\/a> filed complaints that year. Nor has Congress demanded to know who those judges are and why<\/em> they\u2019re not being investigated.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Democrats could hold a \u201cshadow hearing\u201d (chaired by just Democrats), which they\u2019ve held on several other<\/a> rule of law<\/a> topics. If and when Democrats retake the majority, the House Judiciary Committee \u2014 which has apparently decided judicial branch oversight isn\u2019t in its job description anymore \u2014 should immediately hold hearings. Majority members with subpoena power should demand notes and documents revealing systemic misconduct that the courts may have withheld. And, when Congress calls witnesses, while judiciary leadership will stonewall, underlings like DWRs will have on-the-ground information from conversations with clerks about abusive judges, and an insider\u2019s view of leadership\u2019s obfuscation.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Legislation<\/strong><\/p>\n

Congress should reintroduce the Judiciary Accountability Act<\/a> (JAA), which would finally extend Title VII and whistleblower protections to more than 30,000 exempt law clerks, permanent court staff, and federal public defenders<\/a>. Congress should also reintroduce the Transparency and Responsibility in Upholding Standards in the Judiciary<\/a> (TRUST) Act, which would amend the JCD Act so investigations can continue even if judges step down to evade accountability<\/a>. And, Congress should attach a Title VII amendment to a mandatory spending bill (or to the judiciary\u2019s annual budget request).\u00a0<\/p>\n

Appropriations<\/strong><\/p>\n

Congress controls the purse strings and should use the judiciary\u2019s annual budget request<\/a> as a sword and shield. Congress should at least threaten to zero out the judiciary\u2019s budget until they implement meaningful reforms. And the Appropriations Committee should tie judiciary funding to benchmarks for progress. Last May, AO Director Robert Conrad testified before the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee: workplace conduct was the second item in his written testimony<\/a>. Yet not a single member<\/em> askedabout workplace conduct. Conrad will be back this spring: Congress should ask tough questions.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Bully Pulpit<\/strong><\/p>\n

Of all the tools at their disposal, this is perhaps members\u2019 greatest untapped power. Congresspeople have huge national platforms to do new interviews, publish op-eds, and utilize social media to raise awareness, spark dialogue, and effect change. Their silence on this topic is shameful.\u00a0<\/p>\n

This year, every House member and many senators run for reelection. Congress believes they don\u2019t have to act, because constituents don\u2019t know the judiciary is exempt from Title VII, don\u2019t believe this affects them, and won\u2019t hold them accountable by demanding action or voting them out of office. Congress doesn\u2019t understand the courts affect all of us<\/em><\/a>. If you\u2019re frustrated about the lack of accountability for judges who abuse their power \u2014 or think it defies logic that the entire federal judiciary, which interprets our laws, is exempt from all workplace anti-discrimination laws \u2014 hold your member accountable or elect someone who will act<\/em>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The judicial complaint process was not crafted with law clerks in mind. Frankly, it\u2019s set up to shield abusive judges from accountability. But for now, it\u2019s the system we have. I hope clerks see LAP\u2019s complaint and are empowered to come forward, because fixing the system from the inside is how we\u2019ll create meaningful change. Someday, the tide will turn: we\u2019ll remember who was on the right side of history when it was hard.\u00a0<\/p>\n

It would be a stain on the judiciary to shield Judge Merriam from accountability under these circumstances, LAP\u2019s complaint concludes. Pressuring the judiciary to act requires all of us<\/em> \u2014 law clerks, law students, lawyers, members of Congress, and the press \u2014 to demand change and shine a light on misconduct that\u2019s historically been hidden. The judiciary has long exploited clerks\u2019 fears and benefitted from clerks\u2019 silence. Let\u2019s not give them that any longer.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n

Aliza Shatzman is the President and Founder of\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>The Legal Accountability Project<\/em><\/strong><\/a>, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not. She regularly writes and speaks about judicial accountability and clerkships. Reach out to her via email at\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>[email\u00a0protected]<\/em><\/strong><\/a>\u00a0and follow her on Twitter @AlizaShatzman.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

On December 18, 2025, The Legal Accountability Project (LAP) took a meaningful step toward real judicial accountability, filing our first Judicial Conduct and Disability (JC&D) Act complaint against Second Circuit Judge Sarah Merriam. Disturbingly, this is the second misconduct complaint against Judge Merriam in fewer than four years. And it\u2019s the first time a federal […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":142901,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-142900","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/GettyImages-1074209028-620x413-MVQo9Z.jpg?fit=620%2C413&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/142900","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=142900"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/142900\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/142901"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=142900"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=142900"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=142900"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}