Member-only story

Sexual Misconduct By Federal Judges: The Secret System That Protects Them And

Oscar Wilde

·19.4k Followers· Follow

Published in Code Of Silence: Sexual Misconduct By Federal Judges The Secret System That Protects Them And The Women Who Blew The Whistle

7 min read · 2 weeks before

56 View Claps

14 Respond

Save

Listen

A Gavel And A Book With The Title Code Of Silence: Sexual Misconduct By Federal Judges The Secret System That Protects Them And The Women Who Blew The Whistle

Sexual misconduct by federal judges is a serious problem that has been largely hidden from public view. A recent report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that over the past decade, there have been 1,200 allegations of sexual misconduct against federal judges. Of these allegations, only 10% resulted in any disciplinary action.

Code of Silence: Sexual Misconduct by Federal Judges, the Secret System That Protects Them, and the Women Who Blew the Whistle

by Lise Olsen

4.9 out of 5

Language	:	English
File size	:	967 KB
Text-to-Speech	:	Enabled
Enhanced typesetting	:	Enabled
Word Wise	:	Enabled
Print length	:	288 pages
Screen Reader	:	Supported

This is a clear indication that the system for handling sexual misconduct allegations against federal judges is broken. Judges are often able to escape accountability for their actions, even when there is clear evidence of wrongng. This is due to a number of factors, including the secrecy of the judicial disciplinary process, the lack of independent oversight, and the power of the judicial lobby.

In this article, we will take a closer look at the secret system that protects federal judges from accountability for sexual misconduct. We will also discuss the steps that need to be taken to reform this system and ensure that all judges are held to the same standard of accountability.

The Secret System

The system for handling sexual misconduct allegations against federal judges is shrouded in secrecy. The Judicial Conference of the United States, which is the governing body for the federal judiciary, has adopted a number of rules and procedures that make it difficult for the public to learn about allegations of misconduct against judges.

For example, the Judicial Conference requires that all allegations of misconduct be kept confidential. This means that the public is not allowed to know the names of the judges who have been accused of misconduct, the nature of the allegations, or the outcome of any investigations.

The Judicial Conference also has a policy of deferring to the discretion of the chief judges of the federal circuits in handling allegations of misconduct. This means that the chief judges have a great deal of power to decide how to investigate and adjudicate allegations of misconduct.

In many cases, the chief judges have chosen to handle allegations of misconduct in a way that protects the accused judge. For example, some chief judges have dismissed allegations of misconduct without conducting any investigation. Others have conducted investigations that were biased in favor of the accused judge.

The secrecy of the judicial disciplinary process makes it difficult for the public to hold judges accountable for their actions. It also makes it difficult for victims of sexual misconduct to come forward and report their experiences.

The Lack of Independent Oversight

The Judicial Conference is the only body that has the authority to investigate and adjudicate allegations of misconduct against federal judges. This means that there is no independent oversight of the judicial disciplinary process.

This lack of independent oversight is a major problem. It means that the Judicial Conference is able to investigate and adjudicate allegations of misconduct in a way that protects its own members.

For example, the Judicial Conference has been criticized for failing to investigate allegations of misconduct against some of its most powerful members. The Judicial Conference has also been criticized for conducting investigations that were biased in favor of the accused judge.

The lack of independent oversight of the judicial disciplinary process is a major flaw in the system. It makes it difficult to hold judges accountable for their actions and it makes it difficult for victims of sexual misconduct to come forward and report their experiences.

The Power of the Judicial Lobby

The judicial lobby is a powerful force in Washington, D.C. The lobby represents the interests of federal judges and it has been successful in blocking efforts to reform the judicial disciplinary process.

The judicial lobby has argued that the secrecy of the judicial disciplinary process is necessary to protect the privacy of judges and to ensure their independence. The judicial lobby has also argued that the lack of independent oversight of the judicial disciplinary process is necessary to protect the separation of powers between the judiciary and the other branches of government.

The judicial lobby has been successful in blocking efforts to reform the judicial disciplinary process because it has the support of powerful members of Congress. Many members of Congress are reluctant to criticize the judiciary because they do not want to be seen as attacking the independence of the courts.

The power of the judicial lobby is a major obstacle to reforming the judicial disciplinary process. It makes it difficult to hold judges accountable for their actions and it makes it difficult for victims of sexual misconduct to come forward and report their experiences.

Steps to Reform the System

There are a number of steps that need to be taken to reform the system for handling sexual misconduct allegations against federal judges. These steps include:

* Making the judicial disciplinary process more transparent. * Creating an independent body to investigate and adjudicate allegations of misconduct against federal judges. * Giving victims of sexual misconduct more rights and protections. * Strengthening the judicial lobby.

Making the judicial disciplinary process more transparent would allow the public to see how allegations of misconduct are investigated and adjudicated. This would help to ensure that judges are held accountable for their actions and that victims of sexual misconduct are treated fairly.

Creating an independent body to investigate and adjudicate allegations of misconduct against federal judges would remove the conflict of interest that currently exists within the Judicial Conference. An independent body would be more likely to conduct fair and impartial investigations and to hold judges accountable for their actions.

Giving victims of sexual misconduct more rights and protections would make it easier for them to come forward and report their experiences. This would help to ensure that more allegations of misconduct are investigated and that more judges are held accountable for their actions.

Strengthening the judicial lobby would make it more difficult for the lobby to block efforts to reform the judicial disciplinary process. A stronger judicial lobby would be able to represent the interests of federal judges while also advocating for reforms that would make the judiciary more accountable.

These are just a few of the steps that need to be taken to reform the system for handling sexual misconduct allegations against federal judges. By taking these steps, we can ensure that all judges are held to the same standard of accountability and that victims of sexual misconduct are treated fairly.

Sexual misconduct by federal judges is

Code of Silence: Sexual Misconduct by Federal Judges, the Secret System That Protects Them, and the Women Who Blew the Whistle

by Lise Olsen

4.9 out of 5