Fri Dec 13 19:20:00 UTC 2024: **Federal Judge’s Suspension Sparks Constitutional Due Process Challenge**

WASHINGTON, D.C. – A legal battle is brewing over the unprecedented suspension of a senior federal judge, raising serious concerns about due process and judicial independence. Judge Pauline Newman, a Reagan appointee serving on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, was indefinitely suspended in April 2023 after refusing to undergo court-ordered neurological examinations.

The suspension stems from a complaint filed by Chief Judge Kimberly Moore alleging Judge Newman is mentally or physically unfit to serve. Instead of transferring the complaint to another circuit’s judicial council—standard procedure in such cases—Chief Judge Moore established a special committee comprised of Federal Circuit judges to investigate. This committee, including colleagues who had witnessed Judge Newman’s alleged decline, ordered the examinations.

Judge Newman, providing alternative medical evaluations confirming her fitness, refused the court-ordered examinations. The committee subsequently suspended her indefinitely, a decision she is now challenging in court.

In a lawsuit filed in May 2023, Judge Newman argues that the investigation process violates her due process rights. She contends that the same judges who witnessed her alleged decline and are now investigating her are also acting as adjudicators, creating a clear conflict of interest. A district judge dismissed the lawsuit, but Judge Newman has appealed to the D.C. Circuit.

The Manhattan Institute has filed an amicus brief supporting Judge Newman’s appeal, arguing that the current process constitutes an unprecedented constitutional violation. The brief highlights the lack of established procedure for such internal investigations and underscores the potential for abuse of power inherent in the current system. The Institute argues that transferring the case to another circuit for review is crucial to uphold due process and maintain the integrity of the judiciary. The outcome of this appeal will have significant implications for judicial oversight and the rights of federal judges.

Read More