Judicial Committee Won't Revive Kavanaugh Misconduct Complaints
The rules governing federal judicial conduct "unequivocally preclude review of the merits of complaints" against a judge who has been elevated to the U.S. Supreme Court, a federal court body said in an Aug. 1 order.
August 01, 2019 at 01:22 PM
4 minute read
A key judicial conduct committee of the policymaking arm of the federal judiciary Thursday rejected misconduct complaints against now-U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh tied to his testimony last year at his U.S. Supreme Court confirmation hearings.
The nine petitions before the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability were essentially appeals of rulings by the 10th Circuit Judicial Council. The appeals court body had reviewed 83 ethical complaints against Kavanaugh, who was then a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
That council ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the merits of the complaints because Kavanaugh had been elevated to the Supreme Court. Kavanaugh was confirmed in October 2018 in the narrowest Supreme Court confirmation votes in modern history.
“We agree with the reasoning of the Tenth Circuit Judicial Council and conclude the [Judicial Conduct & Disability] Act does not authorize review of the merits of the complaints against Justice Kavanaugh,” the Judicial Conduct and Disability Committee concluded in its order Thursday.
The rules governing the conduct of federal judges “unequivocally preclude review” of the merits of complaints against a judge “who has resigned his or her judicial office and thereafter been confirmed as a justice of the Supreme Court,” the committee said.
“Because the Act does not apply to a judge who has resigned from a covered judicial office and thereafter been confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice, we will deny the petitions for review,” the panel said.
Judge Anthony Scirica of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit chairs the committee. The other committee members who approved the unsigned order dismissing the complaints were: Senior U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker of the Southern District of Indiana; Judge Joel Dubina of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit; Judge Joel Flaum of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit; Senior U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan of of the District of Columbia; U.S. District Judge James Gritzner of the Southern District of Iowa; and Judge Jon Newman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
The petitioners had argued that because Kavanaugh was still a judge on the D.C. Circuit at the time the complaints were filed, the federal courts had jurisdiction under the judicial conduct act to consider the merits of their complaints.
The committee also rejected procedural errors that the petitioners claimed were made by the 10th Judicial Council in its review of the Kavanaugh complaints. The committee stated: “Though the rules recommend a different procedure than the Tenth Circuit Judicial Council followed, we conclude, based on our independent review and affirmance of the Judicial Council’s determination, that any procedural error has caused no prejudice.”
Many of the complaints against Kavanaugh focused on his partisan rant before the Senate Judiciary Committee during his Sept. 27 confirmation hearing. The complaints alleged he displayed improper judicial temperament.
A California professor named Christine Blasey Ford had testified that Kavanaugh, then a high school student in suburban Maryland, sexually assaulted her. Kavanaugh denounced the claim, leveling a partisan diatribe against Senate Judiciary Democrats and accusing them of a “search and destroy” mission.
Kavanaugh subsequently retreated from some of his remarks, saying “I said a few things I should not have said.” Kavanaugh in October vowed he would be an independent justice, arriving at the high court with “no bitterness” about his confirmation proceeding.
The Judicial Conduct and Disability Committee’s decision is below:
Read more:
Ex-Kavanaugh Clerk Deemed ‘Not Qualified’ for Bench Defends His Nomination
Kavanaugh Ethics Complaints Face New Appeals After 10th Circuit Rejection
Brett Kavanaugh Walks Back His Angry Senate Testimony
Nearly 2,000 Female Lawyers Voice Support for Christine Blasey Ford
Appellate Lawyers Who Backed Kavanaugh Say He’s Still Their Man
Alex Kozinski Harassment Allegations Were ‘Gut Punch,’ Kavanaugh Tells Senate
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllIs 1st Circuit the New Center for Trump Policy Challenges?
Insurance Policies Don’t Cover Home Depot's Data Breach Costs, 6th Circuit Says
'Religious Discrimination'?: 4th Circuit Revives Challenge to Employer Vaccine Mandate
2 minute readStanding Spat: Split 2nd Circuit Lets Challenge to Pfizer Diversity Program Proceed
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250