{"id":155298,"date":"2026-06-23T14:14:03","date_gmt":"2026-06-23T22:14:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/06\/23\/what-the-news-is-getting-wrong-about-pauline-newmans-shadow-impeachment\/"},"modified":"2026-06-23T14:14:03","modified_gmt":"2026-06-23T22:14:03","slug":"what-the-news-is-getting-wrong-about-pauline-newmans-shadow-impeachment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/06\/23\/what-the-news-is-getting-wrong-about-pauline-newmans-shadow-impeachment\/","title":{"rendered":"What The News Is Getting Wrong About Pauline Newman\u2019s Shadow Impeachment"},"content":{"rendered":"

I\u2019m going to share what should be an uncontroversial statement: titles matter. We\u2019re inundated with information constantly and, probably more often than we\u2019d like to admit, skim article titles to get the gist of what\u2019s going on. Even when we go the extra mile to read the damned thing, titles frame our understanding of the words to follow. Take, for example, \u201cParagon Of Virtue Clarence Thomas Has Been Given Half Million In Value Off The Record And It Totally Hasn\u2019t Impacted His Judging. Not One Bit. Nope.<\/a>\u201d Based on the title of the story, it probably has something to do with Clarence Thomas, judicial transparency, and ethics. Heads should have turned if it was instead titled \u201cLongest Serving Black Member Of The Supreme Court Faces Ethical Inquiries\u201d because, even if facially true, that title misses key points about what the story is actually<\/em> about \u2014 Clarence\u2019s blackness is incidental to the underlying ethical issues. This may read as a particular egregious hypothetical, but the press coverage of Pauline Newman\u2019s fight against the Federal Circuit circumventing the constitutionally prescribed impeachment protocol has unduly focused on her age for three years now. Many of these stories sandbagged the heart of the matter, the judiciary\u2019s process of self-policing and lack of due process, which has left the public less informed and federal judges in a more precarious position.<\/p>\n

Pauline Newman is not some provincial jurist whose age is the most important thing about her. She\u2019s Pauline fucking<\/em> Newman. Further, her age isn\u2019t even an essential part of the drama. I\u2019d understand the age framing if federal law included a mandatory retirement age, as in states like New York<\/a>. Were that the case, the subject\u2019s age should<\/em> be front and center. But there isn\u2019t. Headlines could call her, \u201cFirst Judge Appointed To The Federal Circuit,\u201d \u201cLongest Serving Active Federal Judge,\u201d or \u201cIP Award Namesake Jurist<\/a>.\u201d Instead, lazy headlines can\u2019t stop pointing to her age. See \u201cColleagues want a 95-year-old judge to retire. She\u2019s suing them instead.\u201d, for example. It would be one thing if it was just the Washington Post<\/a>, but there\u2019s been uniform ball-missing from the press. Just a small sampling: CBS New\u2019s \u201cSupreme Court declines to take up suspended 98-year-old judge\u2019s bid to hear cases again<\/a>\u201c, Bloomberg Law\u2019s Nation\u2019s Oldest Judge Claps Back as She Seeks Reinstatement<\/a>, even NPR\u2019s Why A 98-Year-Old Federal Judge Is Asking The Supreme Court For Her Job Back<\/a>. Even when the title would be otherwise sufficient, they still find a way to throw her age in, take Reuters\u2019 US Supreme Court Won\u2019t Hear Bid By Suspended Judge, 98, To Keep Her Job<\/a>. It is a break in norm to refer to jurists this way. No one wrote the headline \u201cMan, 72, Pens Majority Opinion Overturning Roe v. Wade\u201d back in 2022.<\/p>\n

As much as it pains me to admit FedSoc did a thing correctly, Josh Blackman had the sense to lead with a title that actually<\/em> addressed the matter at hand: The Stealth Impeachment of Judge Newman in the Federal Circuit<\/a>. David Lat displayed his journalistic know-how and good taste with \u201c\u2018Integrity\u2019: An Interview With Judge Pauline Newman<\/a>\u201d over at Original Jurisdiction.<\/p>\n

Moving forward, the focus of these stories should be on what this kind of stealth or shadow impeachment means for unpopular or discounted federal judges:<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

I\u2019m actually rather intrigued by the possibilities raised by the Pauline Newman episode. After a few more years of Trump\/Vance appointments, judges who defy the traditional precepts of natural reason can be declared \u201cmentally unwell\u201d and \u201ctemporarily\u201d (but repetitively) suspended\u2026<\/p>\n

\u2014 Adrian Vermeule (@Vermeullarmine) June 15, 2026<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

This is speculative and may have even been tongue-in-cheek, but I defy you to find the fault in the reasoning behind the method. If judges can get repeatedly suspended by their peers unless you go to your suspending court\u2019s cherry-picked experts \u2014 Newman went to several leading experts and their findings were rejected \u2014 there\u2019s no check on getting rid of judges you don\u2019t like on party grounds. <\/p>\n

As Professor Vermeule replied to his own Tweet: \u201c\u2018Any judge who thinks Obergefell was rightly decided is not only wrong, but insane\u2019 \u2014 the reigning standard in 2036?\u201d <\/p>\n

These are ripe conditions for chilling behavior; there\u2019s already been a noted drop in Federal Circuit dissents since Newman\u2019s bootleg impeachment<\/a>. What check is there if the Chief Judge pressures<\/s> persuades a panel to agree with them on paper even if they actually believe the targeted judge is fit to do their job? There doesn\u2019t seem to be one after the Supreme Court declined to take up Newman\u2019s case. That\u2019s the actual story \u2014 the judge\u2019s age is epiphenomenal to that threat. The reporting done by legacy media sites should have made that clearer.<\/p>\n

Earlier<\/strong>: Pauline Newman Speaks: ATL Interviews The Judge Who\u2019s Fighting To Do Her Job<\/a><\/p>\n

Federal Circuit Dissents Plummet After Pauline Newman\u2019s Ersatz Impeachment<\/a><\/p>\n

Against The Doctor\u2019s Orders: Judge Pauline Newman Suspended For A Year By Her Coworkers<\/a><\/p>\n

Court Of Appeals Snubs Newman From Even Reading Their Emails<\/a><\/p>\n

\n
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

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\u2122 in the Facebook group\u00a0Law School Memes for Edgy T14s . \u00a0He 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\u2019t hurt either. You can reach him by email at christopherrashadwilliams@gmail.com<\/a> and by Tweet\/Bluesky at\u00a0@WritesForRent<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The post What The News Is Getting Wrong About Pauline Newman\u2019s Shadow Impeachment<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(Photo by Bill O’Leary\/The Washington Post via Getty Images)\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

I\u2019m going to share what should be an uncontroversial statement: titles matter. We\u2019re inundated with information constantly and, probably more often than we\u2019d like to admit, skim article titles to get the gist of what\u2019s going on. Even when we go the extra mile to read the damned thing, titles frame our understanding of the words to follow. Take, for example, \u201cParagon Of Virtue Clarence Thomas Has Been Given Half Million In Value Off The Record And It Totally Hasn\u2019t Impacted His Judging. Not One Bit. Nope.<\/a>\u201d Based on the title of the story, it probably has something to do with Clarence Thomas, judicial transparency, and ethics. Heads should have turned if it was instead titled \u201cLongest Serving Black Member Of The Supreme Court Faces Ethical Inquiries\u201d because, even if facially true, that title misses key points about what the story is actually<\/em> about \u2014 Clarence\u2019s blackness is incidental to the underlying ethical issues. This may read as a particular egregious hypothetical, but the press coverage of Pauline Newman\u2019s fight against the Federal Circuit circumventing the constitutionally prescribed impeachment protocol has unduly focused on her age for three years now. Many of these stories sandbagged the heart of the matter, the judiciary\u2019s process of self-policing and lack of due process, which has left the public less informed and federal judges in a more precarious position.<\/p>\n

Pauline Newman is not some provincial jurist whose age is the most important thing about her. She\u2019s Pauline fucking<\/em> Newman. Further, her age isn\u2019t even an essential part of the drama. I\u2019d understand the age framing if federal law included a mandatory retirement age, as in states like New York<\/a>. Were that the case, the subject\u2019s age should<\/em> be front and center. But there isn\u2019t. Headlines could call her, \u201cFirst Judge Appointed To The Federal Circuit,\u201d \u201cLongest Serving Active Federal Judge,\u201d or \u201cIP Award Namesake Jurist<\/a>.\u201d Instead, lazy headlines can\u2019t stop pointing to her age. See \u201cColleagues want a 95-year-old judge to retire. She\u2019s suing them instead.\u201d, for example. It would be one thing if it was just the Washington Post<\/a>, but there\u2019s been uniform ball-missing from the press. Just a small sampling: CBS New\u2019s \u201cSupreme Court declines to take up suspended 98-year-old judge\u2019s bid to hear cases again<\/a>\u201c, Bloomberg Law\u2019s Nation\u2019s Oldest Judge Claps Back as She Seeks Reinstatement<\/a>, even NPR\u2019s Why A 98-Year-Old Federal Judge Is Asking The Supreme Court For Her Job Back<\/a>. Even when the title would be otherwise sufficient, they still find a way to throw her age in, take Reuters\u2019 US Supreme Court Won\u2019t Hear Bid By Suspended Judge, 98, To Keep Her Job<\/a>. It is a break in norm to refer to jurists this way. No one wrote the headline \u201cMan, 72, Pens Majority Opinion Overturning Roe v. Wade\u201d back in 2022.<\/p>\n

As much as it pains me to admit FedSoc did a thing correctly, Josh Blackman had the sense to lead with a title that actually<\/em> addressed the matter at hand: The Stealth Impeachment of Judge Newman in the Federal Circuit<\/a>. David Lat displayed his journalistic know-how and good taste with \u201c\u2018Integrity\u2019: An Interview With Judge Pauline Newman<\/a>\u201d over at Original Jurisdiction.<\/p>\n

Moving forward, the focus of these stories should be on what this kind of stealth or shadow impeachment means for unpopular or discounted federal judges:<\/p>\n

This is speculative and may have even been tongue-in-cheek, but I defy you to find the fault in the reasoning behind the method. If judges can get repeatedly suspended by their peers unless you go to your suspending court\u2019s cherry-picked experts \u2014 Newman went to several leading experts and their findings were rejected \u2014 there\u2019s no check on getting rid of judges you don\u2019t like on party grounds. <\/p>\n

As Professor Vermeule replied to his own Tweet: \u201c\u2018Any judge who thinks Obergefell was rightly decided is not only wrong, but insane\u2019 \u2014 the reigning standard in 2036?\u201d <\/p>\n

These are ripe conditions for chilling behavior; there\u2019s already been a noted drop in Federal Circuit dissents since Newman\u2019s bootleg impeachment<\/a>. What check is there if the Chief Judge pressures<\/span> persuades a panel to agree with them on paper even if they actually believe the targeted judge is fit to do their job? There doesn\u2019t seem to be one after the Supreme Court declined to take up Newman\u2019s case. That\u2019s the actual story \u2014 the judge\u2019s age is epiphenomenal to that threat. The reporting done by legacy media sites should have made that clearer.<\/p>\n

Earlier<\/strong>: Pauline Newman Speaks: ATL Interviews The Judge Who\u2019s Fighting To Do Her Job<\/a><\/p>\n

Federal Circuit Dissents Plummet After Pauline Newman\u2019s Ersatz Impeachment<\/a><\/p>\n

Against The Doctor\u2019s Orders: Judge Pauline Newman Suspended For A Year By Her Coworkers<\/a><\/p>\n

Court Of Appeals Snubs Newman From Even Reading Their Emails<\/a><\/p>\n

\n
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

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\u2122 in the Facebook group\u00a0Law School Memes for Edgy T14s . \u00a0He 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\u2019t hurt either. You can reach him by email at [email\u00a0protected]<\/a> and by Tweet\/Bluesky at\u00a0@WritesForRent<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I\u2019m going to share what should be an uncontroversial statement: titles matter. We\u2019re inundated with information constantly and, probably more often than we\u2019d like to admit, skim article titles to get the gist of what\u2019s going on. Even when we go the extra mile to read the damned thing, titles frame our understanding of the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":155299,"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-155298","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\/06\/Chris-Williams-2025-zYMo95.jpg?fit=512%2C288&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/155298","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=155298"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/155298\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/155299"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=155298"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=155298"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=155298"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}