DC Circuit Denies Judge Newman's Rehearing Bid in Case on Judicial Suspension
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit last week denied U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judge Pauline Newman's petition for rehearing en banc of the D.C. Circuit's decision to reject the judge's lawsuit against her colleagues' investigation into her fitness to continue serving on the bench (Hon. Pauline Newman v. Hon. Kimberly Moore, D.C. Cir. # 23-01334).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
D.C. Circuit Judges Sri Srinivasan, Karen Henderson, Patricia Millett, Cornelia Pillard, Robert Wilkins, Gregory Katsas, Neomi Rao, Justin Walker, Florence Pan and Bradley Garcia denied the petition. Andrew Morris, attorney at the New Civil Liberties Alliance, which is the libertarian advocacy group representing Newman, said in an email that "we're disappointed and surprised by the D.C. Circuit's ruling," adding that he anticipates "petitioning the Supreme Court for certiorari."
The 98-year-old Newman, who is currently subject to a ban from hearing new cases at the Federal Circuit (see 2409060048), launched the case to argue that the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act's remedies provision is facially unconstitutional if it lets judicial councils deprive an Article III judge of the ability to perform the judge's duties "against her will" (see 2412100042).
In August, the D.C. Circuit rejected the judge's claim. The court said "irrespective of whether the provision's application to Judge Newman is constitutional," Newman "agrees that the provision has many other constitutional applications." Newman then vied for a full rehearing from the D.C. Circuit.