US appeals court upholds suspension of 98-year old judge who refused medical evaluations News
© WikiMedia (Bjoertvedt)
US appeals court upholds suspension of 98-year old judge who refused medical evaluations

A US appeals court on Friday upheld a 2023 suspension of a 98-year-old judge who refused to take medical evaluations, preventing cases from being assigned to her.

The D.C. Circuit held that it had no authority to review most of Judge Pauline Newman’s claims due to Section 357(c) of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act, which bars a review of orders coming from judicial councils, thus precluding constitutional arguments from court review. According to the decision, unless the Supreme Court overrules McBryde v. Committee, the case governing Section 357(c), the Circuit court is bound by the precedent.

Judge Pauline Newman had initially articulated several constitutional objections to her suspension. First, she noted that the provision allowing for the suspension of case assignments is unconstitutional as it undermines the lifetime tenure of Article III judges. Additionally, Newman noted that her suspension violated due process and impartiality of the law, accusing the judicial council of unfairly refusing to transfer her case to another circuit.

In 2023, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit started investigating Judge Newman under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act, requesting medical evaluations to assess her fitness. Following her refusal and labelling of the investigation as illegal, the Judicial Council suspended her from receiving new cases for one year, renewing the suspension in 2024.

At the time, Chief Judge Kimberly A. More noted that there was probable cause in the suspension, citing concerns over Newman’s capacity to serve and significant delays in her cases, whereas her legal team deemed the move unconstitutional.