'Did Judge Ho Just Do Something Good?': Trump Appointee Causes Stir on Twitter
The judge's stance against what appeared to be a homophobic legal argument blew up on Twitter Friday.
February 07, 2020 at 05:17 PM
3 minute read
Judge James Ho was the talk of appellate Twitter Friday afternoon. And observers seemed stunned after the conservative jurist from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit appeared to lash out at homophobic legal arguments.
Ho is an appointee of President Donald Trump with a reputation as a conservative, pro-prosecutor jurist. But his strong stance against the legal argument in question garnered applause on social media, as a footnote in the case appeared to cast the judge in a new light.
"Wait," tweeted Twitter user Sam Rubinstein, whose bio describes him as Jewish and gay. "Did Judge Ho just do something good?"
Raffi Melkonian, a Wright, Close & Barger Houston partner, started the conversation on social media.
"Really remarkable footnote from judge Ho, not joined by the other judges on the panel," Melkonian tweeted.
The thread referred to a footnote in a decision released Friday that pitted the parent of an unnamed student against Mississippi's Hinds County School District and three members of its staff.
The parent in the litigation claimed a school employee violated her son's Fourth Amendment rights by searching his pockets after a teacher caught him selling contraband candy, according to the opinion. She alleged the employee also grabbed her son's genitals.
But the footnote in the appellate ruling showed that Ho found the appeal to be frivolous, and stood alone on the panel in wanting to have the plaintiff's lawyer sanctioned for "conduct unbecoming a member of the bar."
"The appeal is demonstrably frivolous on the face of counsel's briefs. Moreover, those briefs not only contain countless misspellings and grammatical errors—they also appear to appeal to prejudice," the footnote reads.
But what it says next set tongues wagging.
"Counsel's opening brief repeatedly contends that 'Brumfield was touching around in minors [sic] pocket, making minor believe the defendant was gay. Her reply brief then concludes that B.O. 'believed that … Broomfield [sic] was gay, making the touch of the minor's privacy area that more offensive,'" the footnote reads. "That is circular logic: Brumfield searched B.O.'s pockets, so he must be gay—and because he is gay, he shouldn't have searched B.O.'s pockets. And the demonstrable failure of counsel's logic makes one wonder why counsel bothers to bring up sexual orientation at all. It should go without saying that members of the bar are expected to engage in legal argument—not prejudice."
Click Here to read the court document
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 AllRead the Document: DOJ Releases Ex-Special Counsel's Report Explaining Trump Prosecutions
3 minute readSpecial Counsel Jack Smith Prepares Final Report as Trump Opposes Its Release
4 minute readPatent Disputes Over SharkNinja, Dyson Products Nearing Resolution
Trending Stories
- 1‘Catholic Charities v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission’: Another Consequence of 'Hobby Lobby'?
- 2With DEI Rollbacks, Employment Lawyers See Potential For Targeting Corporate Commitment to Equality
- 3In-House Legal Network The L Suite Acquires Legal E-Learning Platform Luminate+
- 4In Police Shooting Case, Kavanaugh Bleeds Blue and Jackson ‘Very Very Confused’
- 5Trump RTO Mandates Won’t Disrupt Big Law Policies—But Client Expectations Might
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.