Following up on Friday's post, 8th Circuit Joins 5th, 7th, And 11th Circuits In Dismissing Complaint Against Judges For Refusing To Hire Columbia Law Clerks: Noah Dahl (pseudonym), Judiciary Whiffs Opportunity To Dispel Appearance of Bias:
Last Thursday, the 8th Circuit Judicial Council affirmed the Chief Judge's dismissal of a complaint filed against Judge Daniel Traynor. The order marked the resolution of the last of a flurry of complaints filed in the wake of a letter sent by thirteen federal judges to the president of Columbia University. Fourteen complaints. Five jurisdictions. All dismissed. …
The New York City Bar Association issued a statement responding: “Whatever the merits of [the judges'] criticisms, it is not the business of federal judges—government actors with particularly stringent duties of impartiality—to police the political views of school administrators and faculty.” Nor to change it, one might add. …
I[T]he judges demonstrated a lack of both judicial temperament and the discernment needed to adjudicate reasonably and fairly. Even as he affirmed a right of judges to hire ideologically, Eugene Volokh objected, writing: “we shouldn't threaten innocent neutrals as a means of influencing the culpable.” For a group of judges to engage in just such threats calls their judgment sharply into question. … [T]he judges’ actions do not meet the standards we should expect of a federal judge.
This is not to say that the letter should have resulted in harsh punishment, much less impeachment. Judges are human, after all, with thoughts and opinions and a (limited) right to participate in the public debate. But this was an opportunity for the judicial conduct oversight bodies to state clearly the expectation that judges should avoid partisan and viewpoint-based entanglement as a critical element in maintaining confidence in the judiciary. And they failed miserably.
Had these thirteen judges made a private determination not to entertain candidates from Columbia University, as Justice Brennan once reputedly did regarding Harvard University, that would be perhaps unduly broad, but not misconduct. Had they written a letter expressing general concern for academic safety and freedom of speech, but without threats to enforce ideological diversity, it might have been unusual, but not worth a reprimand. However, to make such a threat and to use it to push for viewpoint-based changes in an academic institution is an act that has no place in the federal (or any) judiciary. Judicial oversight bodies should have said so in no uncertain terms. But as has happened so many times before, judicial overseers put the protection of judges above the integrity of the institution and whiffed mightily at the task of policing its own.
Prior TaxProf Blog coverage:
- New York Times, 54 Columbia Law Faculty Condemn Administration For Disciplinary Action Against Anti-Israel Student Protesters (Apr. 23, 2024)
- Washington Post, Punish Columbia Professors, Not Students Protesters, For The Intellectual Degeneration On Campus (Apr. 28, 2024)
- Law.com, Columbia Law School Delays Exams Amid Protests and Police Activity (May 1, 2024)
- Bloomberg Law, Columbia Law School Offers Optional Pass/Fail Grading Amid Campus Protests (May 2, 2024)
- Washington Free Beacon, “Irrevocably Shaken”: Columbia Law Review Editors Demand Cancellation Of Exams Due To Campus Protests (May 4, 2024)
- Washington Free Beacon, 13 Federal Judges Will Not Hire Law Clerks From Columbia: An ‘Incubator Of Bigotry’ (May 7, 2024)
- Reuters, Columbia Law Dean Voices Confidence In Graduates In Face Of Conservative Judges' Boycott (May 8, 2024)
- Michael Simkovic (USC), Columbia Law Professor Says Columbia University Violated Federal Laws, Fostered A ‘Hostile Environment’ On Campus (May 11, 2024)
- Wall Street Journal, Civil Rights And Antisemitism At Columbia (May 28, 2024)
- The Intercept, Columbia Law Review Refused To Take Down Article On Palestine, So Board Of Directors Took Down Its Website (June 4, 2024)
- New York Times, More On The Columbia Law Review Controversy (June 6, 2024)
- The Intercept, Student Editors Vote 20-5 To Reject Board's Offer To Bring Columbia Law Review Back Online (June 7, 2024)
- David Bernstein (George Mason), Paul Horwitz (Alabama) & Steve Lubet (Northwestern), Reflections On The Columbia Law Review Imbroglio (June 10, 2024)
- National Law Journal, NYC Bar Association Blasts Federal Judges' Columbia Boycott Letter (June 18, 2024)
- City Journal, Columbia Smuggles Activism Into The Law (June 19, 2024)
- 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 (Aug. 7, 2025)
- 11th Circuit Joins 5th Circuit In Dismissing Complaint Against Judges For Refusing To Hire Columbia Law Clerks (Sept. 18, 2024)
- 7th Circuit Judicial Council Dismisses Misconduct Complaint Against Federal Judge For Columbia Law Clerk Boycott (Apr.12, 2025)
- 8th Circuit Joins 5th, 7th, And 11th Circuits In Dismissing Complaint Against Judges For Refusing To Hire Columbia Law Clerks (June 6, 2025)
Editor's Note: If you would like to receive a daily email with links to legal education posts on TaxProf Blog, email me here.
