DC Circuit cites 'constitutional concerns' even as it rejects challenge to suspension of federal appeals judge who's 98

"The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Friday that it does not have jurisdiction to review the bulk of Judge Pauline Newman 's challenge to her suspension, saying it was bound by 2001 precedent that it cannot overrule. The appeals court said the only argument that it could consider was that the statute on judicial suspensions for disability was unconstitutional on its face,"

"and that argument failed because Newman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agrees that the law is constitutional in some applications. Other challenges by Newman are barred by a 2001 D.C. Circuit decision holding that the U.S. Judicial Conference is the exclusive body that can review statutory and as-applied constitutional challenges to judicial council orders, the D.C. Circuit said."

The D.C. Circuit held that it lacks jurisdiction to review most of Judge Pauline Newman 's challenge to her suspension, citing a 2001 precedent that bars such review. The court found only a facial constitutional challenge to the judicial-suspension statute could be considered and rejected that argument because Newman concedes the law is constitutional in some applications. The court noted other challenges are barred because the U.S. Judicial Conference is the exclusive body to review judicial council orders. The opinion questioned the 2001 precedent and appeared to invite further review. Newman, 98, was suspended in 2023 for refusing medical evaluations amid memory-loss allegations.

Read at ABA Journal