U.S. Circuit Judge Pauline Newman (Screengrab via YouTube).
A 97-year-old federal judge, who has been challenging her suspension due to mental health reasons for more than a year, received backing from two legal groups on Thursday.
Pauline Newman, a 1984 Ronald Reagan appointee, “served with distinction” for almost 40 years on the Federal Circuit. However, when her judicial colleagues began reporting concerning behaviors, delays in the judge’s work, and habitual confusion, the circuit commenced an investigation into the judge’s mental health. Newman, however, refused to cooperate.
Nonetheless, the Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability made a finding based on what it called “overwhelming evidence” of Newman’s memory loss, lack of comprehension, and confusion, directing the judge to undergo a 30-45 minute interview with a neurologist and a full neuropsychological examination.
Newman refused, and the committee issued a suspension order that blocked her from receiving any new case assignments. Newman next sued Chief Circuit Judge Kimberly A. Moore and all the other Federal Circuit judges on the committee. The lawsuit was dismissed at the district court level, and Newman appealed.
Newman, through counsel, also filed a motion to unseal documents related to the committee’s investigation and findings that are subject to a Dec. 4 gag order. In the motion, Newman’s legal team said that the defendants in the case — Newman’s judicial colleagues — have refused to abide by rules of judicial conduct, have “threatened Judge Newman and her counsel with unspecified sanctions” for making documents public, and have “sought to direct the process within their own forum” in an “entirely inappropriate effort” to contradict the law.
Two amici briefs were filed supporting Newman on Thursday. Conservative think tank The Buckeye Institute filed a 37-page amicus brief focusing on the issue of unsealing the reports against Newman. It argued that public confidence in the judiciary would be undermined by the “improper secrecy” of keeping the reports hidden.
The Bar Association of the District of Columbia also filed a short brief in which it argued that Newman’s suspension is unconstitutional because federal judges can only be impeached by Congress.
In its filing, the group cited Dr. Seuss’ “The Lorax” in its contention that it submits on behalf of “widespread, but silent, support for Judge Newman’s appeal among the Federal Circuit’s practitioner community.”
“I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues,” quoted the bar association in its 9-page filing.
It went on to argue that lawyers fear that publicly supporting Newman might adversely impact their own appeals pending before the Federal Circuit and that their silence underscores why Newman’s suspension should be viewed with skepticism.
