Federal Judge Still Overseeing Discrimination Case After Bizarre Race Remarks

[TexasTowelie]

U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes

A federal judge in Houston who made bizarre remarks during a hearing on a racial discrimination case he’s overseeing will not step down. A 5th Circuit ruling last week, rejecting a petition to have Hughes recused from the case, appears to be the final word on the matter.

Jitendra Shah, an Indian-American engineer, sued the Texas Department of Criminal Justice in July 2012, alleging that the agency had discriminated against him on the basis of his race and religion. Shah wants U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes, a 72-year-old Reagan appointee, to recuse himself from the case because of comments Hughes made during a December pre-trial hearing.

In that ex parte hearing, during which only TDCJ lawyers were present, Hughes launched into a colloquy on Adolf Hitler’s use of swastikas, the origin of Caucasians and the futility of diversity programs at universities. He quoted Eleanor Roosevelt opining that “staffs of one color always work better.” It is not the first time Hughes’ views on race during discrimination cases have attracted attention. In January, the 5th Circuit admonished Hughes for dismissing a racist slur as “political” and opining that “no black individually and no blacks collectively owns [sic] the sensitivity rights to fried chicken or anything else.”

In January, Shah asked Hughes to recuse himself from the case, arguing that the judge had demonstrated bias and couldn’t rule on the case impartially. Hughes refused to rule on the motion and Shah took the matter to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. Last week, the 5th Circuit rejected Shah’s petition and Hughes remains on the case. In a filing with the court, the judge defended his remarks. “Discussion of history and race does not evince a bias against people who are Indian, Hindu, both, or anyone else,” he wrote.

More at http://www.texasobserver.org/federal-judge-still-overseeing-discrimination-case-bizarre-race-remarks/ .

[Manifestor_of_Light]

1. He's mean and egotistical.

I worked for him in Federal court.

He was also mean as a law professor. He taught Constitutional Law at my law school. The one piece of advice I got there about profs was "DO NOT take Lynn Hughes for Con Law. He'll embarrass you in front of the whole class, if he can, and he's a tough grader."


I ended up taking Con Law from a useless former Jesuit priest, Peter Riga, who had 12 college degrees and wasted the class time ranting about how terrible Roe v. Wade was, and his circuits shorted out. I complained to the assistant dean about his anti-abortion rants but of course it did no good.

[DhhD]

2. This says to me that there is no alternative in the law (courts) or at the law (school); points to

one and the same. What a set up!

[TexasTowelie]

3. OMG, you have suffered tremendously.

He has the same prickish smirk as Dick Cheney so the storyline fits the photo well.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

4. There was a woman who micromanaged the Federal Court Reporters.

I was taking down a trial in his court that was about the red-cockaded woodpecker. The government was clear-cutting a national forest in East Texas, in what is called The Big Thicket.
The trial was about removing the habitat of this endangered woodpecker.

All the guys who testified were big macho forestry guys in flannel shirts with beards and deep voices. I had to stop them sometimes and ask them to repeat words or spell a word. This was very technical stuff. I hold a Bachelor of Arts in Biology from the best pre-med school in the state, but this was not familiar to me.

Later, the micromanager called me into her office and told me that I was not supposed to ask the witness to repeat anything; I was supposed to ask the JUDGE to ask the witness to repeat it.
IOW, I was not supposed to do my job as the preserver of the record. Nobody had told me this beforehand.

This was just like every other job I have had where insane people run the asylum. They get mad at me and/or fire me for violating some stupid rule that they didn't tell me about. They never answered me when I asked them how was I supposed to know that if they didn't tell me beforehand. Did they issue me a crystal ball?

I only tolerated the egotism and formality of Federal Court for six weeks before I went back to State Court, because I could not stand it. The young Federal judges (like Lynn Hughes when he was young--this was the late 80s) were arrogant and snotty. The older judges like Carl Bue and Ross Sterling were laid back and didn't need to have their egos stroked to know that we respected the office.

Working at the courthouse will drive you nuts, state or federal.

There are plenty of judges and former judges out there that nobody likes, because they're nasty to everyone working for them, for no good reason. I have no faith in the legal system at all.

I have PTSD from being a court stenographer for twenty years. Made me hate humanity in general.