Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
A federal judge in D.C. hit "reply all," and now there's a formal question about his decorum
A federal judge in D.C. hit "reply all," and now there’s a formal question about his decorum
Link to tweet
Legal Issues
A federal judge in D.C. hit ‘reply all,’ and now there’s a formal question about his decorum
By Ann E. Marimow
August 16 at 6:45 AM
A clash between judges on two important federal courts in Washington has created an early, unusual test of new rules intended to make sure courthouses across the country are civil, harassment-free workplaces. ... And it’s exposed the perils of the reply-all email, even among judges-for-life.
An exchange about a climate change seminar for judges set off the controversy, after a two-sentence heads-up message about the session — co-sponsored by the research and education agency of the judiciary, the Federal Judicial Center — was sent. ... One judge’s share about the event provoked a pushback email from a colleague, who questioned the judge’s ethics and climate change science, and urged the judge to stick to his lane on what “you are being paid to do” — adding that “the jurisdiction assigned to you does not include saving the planet.”
The correspondence that went to 45 judges and the staff who monitor their email accounts was obtained and confirmed by The Washington Post and is an uncommon exposure of private conversations among the usually discreet federal bench. ... It also poses the question about how the judiciary now will police itself.
The federal judge who flagged the event, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, on Aug. 1 asked the judiciary’s committee that oversees judges’ conduct to deliver an opinion about whether the brusque reply-all from senior appeals court Judge A. Raymond Randolph was a violation and also should be a reason for Randolph to recuse himself from certain cases.
“This is really remarkable. The public doesn’t get to listen in on the manner in which judges talk to each other in private discussions,” Stephen Gillers, a professor at New York University Law School and judicial ethics expert, said after being told about the emails The Post acquired.
Sullivan and Randolph, who both are in their 70s and have spent decades on the bench, declined to comment on the confidential inquiry.
....
Ann Marimow covers legal affairs for The Washington Post. She joined The Post in 2005 and has covered state government and politics in California, New Hampshire and Maryland. Follow https://twitter.com/amarimow
A federal judge in D.C. hit ‘reply all,’ and now there’s a formal question about his decorum
By Ann E. Marimow
August 16 at 6:45 AM
A clash between judges on two important federal courts in Washington has created an early, unusual test of new rules intended to make sure courthouses across the country are civil, harassment-free workplaces. ... And it’s exposed the perils of the reply-all email, even among judges-for-life.
An exchange about a climate change seminar for judges set off the controversy, after a two-sentence heads-up message about the session — co-sponsored by the research and education agency of the judiciary, the Federal Judicial Center — was sent. ... One judge’s share about the event provoked a pushback email from a colleague, who questioned the judge’s ethics and climate change science, and urged the judge to stick to his lane on what “you are being paid to do” — adding that “the jurisdiction assigned to you does not include saving the planet.”
The correspondence that went to 45 judges and the staff who monitor their email accounts was obtained and confirmed by The Washington Post and is an uncommon exposure of private conversations among the usually discreet federal bench. ... It also poses the question about how the judiciary now will police itself.
The federal judge who flagged the event, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, on Aug. 1 asked the judiciary’s committee that oversees judges’ conduct to deliver an opinion about whether the brusque reply-all from senior appeals court Judge A. Raymond Randolph was a violation and also should be a reason for Randolph to recuse himself from certain cases.
“This is really remarkable. The public doesn’t get to listen in on the manner in which judges talk to each other in private discussions,” Stephen Gillers, a professor at New York University Law School and judicial ethics expert, said after being told about the emails The Post acquired.
Sullivan and Randolph, who both are in their 70s and have spent decades on the bench, declined to comment on the confidential inquiry.
....
Ann Marimow covers legal affairs for The Washington Post. She joined The Post in 2005 and has covered state government and politics in California, New Hampshire and Maryland. Follow https://twitter.com/amarimow
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
