Judge Eleanor Ross is getting a lot of justified scorn right now, but folks are really not directing enough disdain toward her judicial colleagues. While carrying out an affair with a high-ranking law enforcement official in chambers and then lying about it will probably end up getting the Peach State judge impeached, there’s not enough of an uproar over the judges from the Eleventh Circuit and Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability who saw the facts of this matter and decided the right response was to bar Ross from having to deal with the administrative burden of serving as a chief judge and to write apology letters to her clerks.
These judges even went so far as to structure the punishment as a private reprimand, hoping to keep the judge on the bench and the public entirely unaware. Except they failed to write a report sufficiently anonymized to fool basic AI.
As for those apology letters, Judge Ross had the gall to look the gift horse square in the mouth and asked if she could keep the letters vague. Arguably the only real penalty she expected to get from this was a wrist slapping, and she wanted it to hit even softer. AND THE OTHER JUDGES AGREED. “The special committee recommends that the Judicial Council instruct the Subject Judge to use the judge’s best judgment in drafting letters of apology that communicate the judge’s sentiments without risking undue embarrassment to the Subject Judge or the judiciary.” The only caveat they imposed was that the vague language still be “sufficiently specific” that the clerks could understand what it was about.
The New York Times obtained one of the apology letters that Judge Ross sent her clerks and… wow.
Thank you for your contributions to our court during your clerkship. I convey my deepest apology for not taking steps to ensure that it was a more positive experience. I wish you all the best in your future legal endeavors and in life.
In her defense, that probably is specific enough for any clerk who sat 10 steps from the taxpayer-supported Love Shack. But it’s exactly the mockery of the process that we all imagined when we read the report blessed her request to keep the letters vague.
If you think — as a lot of folks seem to — that Ross’s behavior so deeply compromises public faith in the judiciary that it warrants her removal from the bench, how can you look the other way when it comes to the many other federal judges who… looked the other way? They looked at these facts and concluded that it not only didn’t warrant serious punishment, but that the public should never know who did it.
That seems like at least as serious of a blow to the credibility of the judiciary.
Sex, Lies and Secrets: A Federal Judge’s Trysts Go Public [New York Times]
Earlier: Judge Eleanor Ross Impeachment Arrives Right On Schedule, Managing To Yet Again Botch The Standard
Federal Judge Had Sex In Chambers Bringing New Meaning To Gavel Bang
Judiciary Tried To Hide ‘Sex In Chambers’ Judge’s Name. It Left A Roadmap To Identify Eleanor Ross Instead.
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter or Bluesky if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news.
