Judges make rule changes to handle #MeToo complaints

Legal

Federal Justice Tuesday approved a set of rule changes to address complaints that the judges' system of professional misconduct would deter employees from reporting abusive or harassing behavior.

The 26-member Judicial Conference, the governing body of federal courts, has implemented "a wave of changes" in the rules applicable to judges and judicial personnel to clarify the definitions of fault, told reporters at the Supreme Court the chief judge of the DC circuit.

History continues below

As the #MeToo movement became more and more important in 2017, the federal judiciary was criticized by former paralegals who said that the warnings to respect the confidentiality of court proceedings actually had the effect of Stifle complaints about judges having made obscene proposals or intimidated their collaborators.

"We have tried to come up with a whole series of ways for people to raise their concerns about misconduct in the hope that it will warn us in time to do something about bad behavior," Garland said. "Obviously, the idea is to solve the problem."

The rule changes make it clear that the codes of conduct of the judiciary prohibit "unwanted, offensive or abusive sexual behavior, including harassment or sexual assault". Treat employees, litigants or others "in an obvious or egregious manner" or create a hostile work environment Employees are also subject to discipline under the new rules.

Judges also have an obligation to report "reliable" information that they have received that a colleague or colleague is alleged to have committed professional misconduct or suffered from a disability that would hinder their work, stated Garland.

The new procedure will aim to put staff members at ease to express their concerns by not requiring a complaint or a formal process in each case, he said.

"Very often, a complainant does not want it to become public either. They just want the problem to be solved, "said Garland. "There are informal ways to do it."

No specific case was mentioned publicly on Tuesday, but the action of the judiciary in this area was largely motivated by allegations published in 2017 that 9^th Circuit judge Alex Kozinski routinely made inappropriate sexual comments to law clerks and showed sexually explicit images. Kozinski apologized and resigned as the storm on his driving intensified.

"I've always had a broad sense of humor and a straightforward way of talking to male and female jurists." In doing so, I may not have been sufficiently aware of the difficulties and pressures women face in their workplace, Kozinski wrote: "It saddens me to learn that I have badly put one or the other of my employees, this has never been my intention. "

Some Kozinski employees expressed concern that complaining about his conduct would undermine the promise not to reveal what was happening in the judge's room.

The new rules state that employees' duty to keep certain things confidential "does not prevent, nor should discourage, an employee or former employee from reporting or disclosing misconduct, including sexual or other harassment, by a judge, supervisor or other person. . "

In the aftermath of the Kozinski controversy, the federal courts created a national office of judicial integrity that provides another avenue for complaints and education of staff and judges on how to deal with workplace issues. Two circuits, the D.C. and the 9^th Circuit, have also appointed workplace coordinators to deal with internal complaints.

Despite the changes passed on Tuesday, there are limits to what the judiciary can do, Garland said. While colleagues may reprimand or temporarily deflect ghost judge missions, only Congress can dismiss a judge through the impeachment process.

As a result, the day-to-day discipline process of judges will remain under the control of other judges.

"It's an independent arm of the government, and we think we can control our own police," Garland said.