Federal Judicial Conduct

Complaints against federal judges are filed under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, as amended.  Under the Act, any person may file a written complaint alleging that a judge has engaged in "conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts" or "is unable to discharge all duties of office by reason of mental or physical disability."

Complaints are filed with the chief judge of the court of appeals in the circuit in which the judge sits, through the clerk of the court. The chief judge may also “identify a complaint” in a written order stating reasons.  After reviewing a complaint (and perhaps engaging in a limited inquiry),  the chief judge either:

• dismisses the complaint,
• concludes the proceeding if corrective action has been taken, or
• appoints a special committee.

Most complaints are dismissed, and the most frequent ground for dismissing a complaint is that it is "directly related to the merits of a decision or procedural ruling," a grounds established by the Act.  A complaint may also be dismissed if it lacks sufficient evidence to raise an inference that misconduct has occurred or contains allegations that are incapable of being established through investigation or if a limited inquiry demonstrates that the allegations in the complaint lack any factual foundation or are conclusively refuted by objective evidence.  A chief judge may also conclude a complaint upon finding that appropriate corrective action has been taken or that intervening events make action no longer necessary. See www.uscourts.gov/judbus2006/tables/s22.pdf.  The complainant can petition to the circuit judicial council for review if the chief judge dismisses a complaint or concludes a proceeding.

If a complaint is not dismissed, a special committee is appointed to investigate the allegations in the complaint and file a written report with the circuit judicial council. The judicial council may:

• dismiss the complaint,
• certify the disability of a judge,
• request that a judge voluntarily retire,
• order that, on a temporary basis for a time certain, no further cases be assigned to a judge,
• censure or reprimand the judge by private communication,
• censure or reprimand the judge by public announcement, or
• order such other action as it considers appropriate under the circumstances.

The complainant or the judge who is the subject of a complaint may petition the United States Judicial Conference for review of any action taken by a circuit judicial council.  Federal judges cannot be removed under the Act, although the Judicial Conference can refer a complaint to the House of Representatives for consideration of impeachment.

In 1986, a special committee of the chief judges of the courts of appeals formulated Illustrative Rules Governing Complaints of Judicial Conduct and Disability, which were revised in 2000. Most circuit councils adopted the Illustrative Rules verbatim or with slight modifications.

Based on the 2006 report of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act Study Committee (known as the Breyer Committee for its chair, Justice Stephen Breyer), the 2008 Rules for Judicial Conduct and Disability Proceedings adopted by the Judicial Conference replace the Illustrative Rules, providing mandatory, nationally uniform rules and superseding any conflicting judicial council rules although “councils may promulgate additional rules . . . as long as those rules do not conflict.” The new Rules adopt many of the standards for evaluating complaints used by the Breyer Committee, including extensive discussion of statutory terms such as “corrective action,” “related to the merits,” and “conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts.”

The new rules clarify under what circumstances a chief judge should exercise the statutory authority to “identify a complaint” and start an inquiry without waiting for a complaint to be filed. In addition, a new rule fills “a jurisdictional gap” by permitting the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability to review dismissal of a complaint if “one or more members of a judicial council reviewing a petition have dissented on the ground that a special committee should have been appointed” although review is allowed only of the decision not to appoint a special committee. There is also a new rule that implements the Breyer Committee’s recommendation that some complaint proceedings should be transferred to a judicial council in a different circuit selected by the Chief Justice, for example, “where the issues are highly visible and a local disposition may weaken public confidence in the process.”
 

For further information regarding complaints against federal judges, click here: