Lawyer alleges 'impeachment by subterfuge' after federal appeals judge, 97, suspended for another year
Judge Pauline Newman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in May 2023. Newman, who turned 97 years old in June, has been suspended from hearing cases for another year amid concerns about her “cognitive state.” (Photo by Bill O’Leary/The Washington Post via Getty Images)
Judge Pauline Newman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has been suspended from hearing cases for another year amid concerns about her “cognitive state.”
The Federal Circuit’s judicial council on Friday approved the extended suspension for Newman, who turned 97 years old in June.
Bloomberg Law via How Appealing, Law360 and Reuters have coverage.
The judicial council accepted a special committee’s July recommendation, which was based on Newman’s refusal to participate in a probe of her mental fitness.
The special committee cited “strong concerns” established by evidence “showing troubling signs of cognitive decline, often resulting in angry and abusive behavior towards staff, with many witnesses describing increasingly erratic behavior in 2023.”
Newman was first suspended in September 2023 when she was not allowed to hear new cases. The judicial council cited Newman’s refusal to submit to medical evaluations, provide medical records and sit for an interview. She had cited the opinions of two of her doctors who said she is fit to continue her job.
Newman’s lawyer, Gregory Dolin of the New Civil Liberties Alliance, a nonprofit public interest law firm, said he plans to ask the U.S. Judicial Conference’s Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability to review the decision.
“This is an impeachment by subterfuge by a body that’s not authorized to impeach,” Dolin told Law360.
Newman’s brief said she “can hardly be blamed for reposing little trust in the ability of the special committee to fairly adjudicate this matter” given a “history of factual misstatements, misleading claims, legal errors and overall hostility and antagonism,” according to Law360.
Newman’s separate lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act was dismissed in July. The law governs the procedure for circuit judicial councils to take action on complaints regarding judges’ physical and mental disabilities.
U.S. District Judge Christopher R. Cooper of the District of Columbia ruled that the law does not violate the Fourth Amendment in all its applications and is not unconstitutionally vague. The decision is being appealed.
See also:
Investigations of federal judges are rare and should happen more, former clerk says
