Shocking new allegations of sexual harassment against the late "liberal lion" Judge Stephen Reinhardt are putting a renewed focus on misconduct within the federal judiciary, with many questioning how such alleged behavior could remain largely secret until years after his death.

Thursday's testimony from former Reinhardt law clerk Olivia Warren alleged a series of misconduct from the judge as Warren worked in his chambers in 2017 and 2018. Among other claims, Warren said Reinhardt, who died in 2018, repeatedly subjected her to abusive language  and accused her of making up her prior experiences with sexual harassment.

Warren's testimony quickly engulfed the legal community, and spurred calls for the federal judiciary to do more to protect clerks and others who worked in courtrooms from such behavior.

During and after Thursday's House Judiciary subcommittee hearing on misconduct within the federal judiciary, lawmakers vowed to keep working on the topic.

Rep. Hank Johnson, the chairman of the courts subcommittee, said in a statement after the hearing that Warren's testimony reminded lawmakers "of what we have long known is a problem—that systemic harassment, discrimination, and abuses of power are entrenched in our federal court system."

"Our witnesses testified that the existing sexual harassment protections, including the reporting framework, are clearly inadequate. We must create reporting avenues that protect victims and their confidentiality," Johnson said. "I look forward to being part of the solution as we change the federal courts into a safer place to work for all employees."

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, who mentioned at the hearing that he clerked for the Southern District of New York after law school, said afterward that in considering future hearings, he would like to hear from "a panel of judges who have rulemaking authority in the context of the atmosphere that exists for clerks and other employees of the judiciary."

Jeffries added he would also like to hear from prominent law school deans who he believes could help shape the discussion.

The subcommittee's ranking member, Rep. Martha Roby, said at Thursday's hearing that she is committing to "rigorous oversight" on the topic.

She reiterated that point in a statement after the hearing, saying she is "committed to rigorous oversight of the judiciary to ensure the rights of employees and the systems in place to report abuses are widely known and effective."

And Rep. Ben Cline, another GOP member of the panel, said he welcomes "a discussion to further improvements to the process to make it more transparent, to protect confidentiality and to ensure that every victim is heard."

What exactly those next steps are remains unclear. However, the topic does seem to have bipartisan support in the House, currently a rarity for many issues on Capitol Hill.

The Judicial Conference formed a working group two years ago, at the direction of Chief Justice John Roberts, to focus on misconduct reforms. It released a report last year with suggestions on how to improve existing policies and procedures, and revised the codes of conduct for judges and judicial employees to explicitly label sexual harassment as misconduct.

Individual courts have also been working on the issue: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and the D.C. District Court earlier this week announced new plans on how employees can report misconduct.

After Warren's testimony was made public Thursday, a Judiciary representative said in a statement that the judiciary is "deeply concerned about the new information we have learned through Ms. Warren's statement, and we take her statement very seriously."

"We are committed to addressing this new information and continuing to refine our processes and procedures for protecting our employees and addressing misconduct," the representative said.

The other witnesses testifying at Thursday's hearing offered suggestions for ways they believed lawmakers could improve reporting of sexual misconduct and other issues within the judiciary.

Warren said she personally could have benefited from more clear guidelines on what to do when the sexual harassment from Reinhardt was happening.

"I believe a system should make it easy for a law clerk, in a moment of distress, to know where to go and to provide answers," she said. "This burden should not have been on me."

Deeva Shah, co-founder of the group Law Clerks for Workplace Accountability, also said that law schools should be involved in the conversation, as they often direct their students to clerkships.

She said schools should be incentivized to report any problematic behavior by judges that their current or former students relay, but currently may be wary of cutting off a connection to a prestigious district or circuit court.

Shah added that sometimes allegations about a judge or a clerkship are only promoted through "whisper networks," but law schools can play a role in making some risks more well-known.

"Law schools have to be better about making sure their students understand those risks before they start clerking," Shah said.

Dahlia Lithwick, a senior editor Slate who covers legal issues and another witness who appeared Thursday, previously revealed her own harassment by former Judge Alex Kozinski, who sat alongside Reinhardt on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. She said the lopsided power dynamic between a judge and their clerks means that others, including other judges, should call out misconduct they witness.

"I think the pressure on other judges to come forward and behave like bystanders who have dogs in this fight, it really becomes essential," Lithwick said.

And she said that changes must be made after women report misconduct they experience in the judiciary.

"I think part of the problem is that we all feel the machinery will never change and all that we're doing is harming our own prospects and our own futures by coming forward," Lithwick said. "The only way this changes is not just for women to come forward and stick their necks out, but for the machine to change around them."

Chai Feldblum, a Morgan, Lewis & Bockius partner who was testifying in her capacity as a former commissioner on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, said the misconduct issues don't apply to just law clerks, but all the other people who work in federal courthouses.

Speaking after Thursday's hearing, Feldblum said she was "truly encouraged" by the hearing and the bipartisan support for the issue, noting that Cline stayed for the entire proceeding.

When asked whether the federal judiciary's efforts to combat this kind of misconduct were enough, Feldblum replied, "It's never enough if it doesn't keep getting added to so it is truly effective and sustainable."

"A working report is a good first step and I don't think that anyone can believe that's the only step, I don't think they believe that," Feldblum said. "But let's have everyone working together, supporting them in what they want to do. And obviously one always holds to account any institution that's not addressing it."

Johnson noted the initial purpose of the hearing was to hear from the Judicial Conference, the federal judiciary's policymaking body, about updates from its September status report on efforts to address judicial misconduct.

However, Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts Director James Duff said in a letter to the committee last week that he could not appear because of a letter sent to him by several Judiciary Committee members about the misconduct of U.S. District Judge Carlos Murguia, who admitted to several allegations of sexual harassment and other charges.

Duff said that, even if the Murguia letter wasn't mentioned at the hearing, it could still be considered as him commenting on it, which he cannot while the Judicial Conference is still reviewing the matter. "I request that you first allow our process of reviewing the Murguia matter to run its course, after which time I would be pleased to attend a hearing," he wrote in the Feb. 7 letter.

Read more: