No, I'm not talking about any particular judge in our district.
I'm talking about Pauline Newman of the Federal Circuit. She's 96 and members of the court have complained about her bouts of paranoia, memory loss, and confusion.
Here's an article detailing how the court there is trying to deal with it. And it ain't pretty:
U.S. appeals judge Pauline Newman has committed "serious misconduct" by refusing to cooperate with a mental fitness probe and should be suspended from hearing new cases for one year or until she submits to a court-ordered examination, an investigative panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in a report released on Friday.The report cited statements from "many different staff members describing memory loss, confusion, paranoia and angry rants" by Newman, who is 96 and has been a Federal Circuit judge for nearly four decades. Newman has shown "significant mental deterioration," it said.
Meantime, Judge Edith Jones of the 5th Circuit has written an op-ed in the WSJ defending Newman.
The conclusion:
But in Judge Newman’s case, it appears that career-ending removal from her judicial duties is being imposed by her court, with no time limit and with little heed for the regulations and case law. At odds with fundamental due process, members of her own court sit in inherently conflicting positions as prosecutors, judges, jurors and witnesses.
To obviate unethical conflicts and provide objectivity, the normal application of judicial misconduct rules requires that a matter about a circuit-court judge be transferred to another circuit’s chief judge and Judicial Council. The chief justice and a committee of the Judicial Conference of the U.S. could enforce this norm. Why the usual practice wasn’t followed here is inexplicable.
10 comments:
I guess they get so used to denying it to everyone else, that it just seems natural to deny basic due process protections to a colleague.
I find Judge Newman's actions to be reprehensible and inexcusable. That said, I largely agree with Judge Jones; it would seem that, for purposes of impartiality and to avoid potential awkward situations and conflicts, her case should have been transferred to another circuit. But Judge Jones goes a bit too far when she writes that the process was "[a]t odds with fundamental due process." I mean, this isn't a criminal trial, and anybody who has followed this case knows that Judge Newman has been given plenty of notice and plenty of opportunities to be heard.
End life tenure. 15 years then up or out. 15 years on the Supreme Court.
Another judge question. Why do judges have to demean and berate lawyers for just trying to do their jobs. I understand that lawyers can be jerks, but even in that situation, shouldn't the judge take the high road. But for lawyers who worked hard and are prepared, why should they be treated like that because the judge doesn't agree with their argument.
To 3:25
Your welcome.
Old judges never die. They are sent to back up Hialeah branch court.
You’re welcome
Btw it’s 2023 can we do away with the captcha stuff that has me trying 22 times to click on the sidewalks.
Bring back Mattie Belle Davis.
Even in this jurisdiction, there have been some judges that have been too old and too out of touch with contemporary issues to preside. To be a judge, you must be "hip" to what the world is like...not how it used to be !
I've notice young inexperienced female judges are EXTRA nasty to female lawyers.... why is that?? Are they THAT insecure??
The old ones are hanging on to avoid young idiots being confirmed
Post a Comment