11th Circuit Joins 5th Circuit In Dismissing Complaint Against Judges For Refusing To Hire Columbia Law Clerks

Following up on my previous post: Fifth Circuit Judicial Council Upholds Dismissal Of Prisoner's Complaint Against 8 Trump-Appointed Federal Judges Who Vowed Not To Hire Columbia Graduates As Law Clerks:

Judicial Council for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, Nos. 11-24-90106 & 11-24-90107 (Aug. 12, 2024):

[T]his Judicial Council Review Panel has considered … petitioner's complaint, the order of Chief United States Circuit Judge William H. Pryor Jr., and the petition for review filed by petitioner. No judge on this panel has requested that this matter be placed on the agenda of a meeting of the Judicial Council.

The Judicial Council Review Panel hereby AFFIRMS the disposition of this matter by Chief Judge Pryor. The petition for review is DENIED.

Chief Judge William H. Pryor Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, Nos. 11-24-90106 & 11-24-90107 (June 18, 2024):

Complainant states that the Subject Judges “represent a threat to the Constitution and must be removed from judicial office. Their conduct has made it apparent that they are politicians and possibly foreign agents masquerading as federal judges. The judges’ resort to collective punishment is an affront to this nation’s core principles of individuality and individual rights.” He asserts the Subject Judges are “anti-American,” that their “unprecedented an explicit declaration of partiality has eroded the public’s trust in the independence of the judiciary,” and that their conduct “violated fundamental standards for judicial conduct and requires their removal from office.” …

The Complaint fails to present a basis for a finding of misconduct. Federal judges routinely hire law clerks and must consider applicants’ educational backgrounds in determining whether an applicant is qualified for, and will succeed in, the job. As part of that consideration, judges are permitted to make reasonable conclusions regarding the value and quality of a school’s educational program.

Complainant’s claims are based on allegations lacking sufficient evidence to raise an inference that the Subject Judges used their office to obtain special treatment for friends, engaged in partisan political activity or made inappropriate partisan statements, treated or will treat individuals in a demonstrably egregious and hostile manner, discriminated against individuals, violated the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, or otherwise engaged in misconduct. Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(D). For that reason, this Complaint is DISMISSED.