Staff for a 95-year-old federal judge say she is 'losing it, mentally' and talking to a dead colleague

[quote]"One staff member relayed a recent episode in which Judge Newman indicated that she was not required to comply with a court rule… because Chief Judge Markey told her she could take 30 days to vote," the decision said. "Chief Judge Markey has been dead for almost 17 years and has not been a member of the court for 32 years."

[quote]In one case, she sat on a decision for more than 600 days before it was quietly handed off to another judge who took just a month to rule on it, the opinion said.

I applaud her vigor!

This is probably what the US Supreme Court is like too.

A white woman doesn’t want to give up power for the Greater good? I’m ever so shocked.

She's 96 now and she's just been suspended.

[quote]In the unanimous order, which was issued by the court’s active judges, Judge Newman’s colleagues wrote that they had no choice but to suspend her, despite her status as “a highly valued and respected colleague,” widely recognized for her contributions to the court and knowledge of the patent system. “With no rational reason — other than frustration over her own confusion — Judge Newman has threatened to have staff arrested, forcibly removed from the building and fired,” the order said. “She accused staff of trickery, deceit, acting as her adversary, stealing her computer, stealing her files and depriving her of secretarial support.”

[quote]Her refusal to comply with a special committee’s order that she be examined by a neurologist and undergo neuropsychological tests “constitutes serious misconduct,” the order said. It said she could be suspended again in one year if she continued to refuse to undergo the required tests.

[quote]It is not uncommon for federal judges, who have life tenure, to serve into their later years. Judge Wesley E. Brown, who died in 2012, regularly presided over cases well past his 104th birthday, with a tube under his nose feeding him oxygen during hearings.

Paranoia and accusing people of crimes is a classic symptom of dementia. My grandmother also accused people of tapping her phones.

Fortunately, she had a stroke and died just a few months later.

She was great in Hud.

There is mass mental illness among the older generations it seems. They refuse to retire and wind up like this.

This is exactly what my mother does. She was the boss of several car dealerships and almost everything similar happened like that at her work. The coworkers had to trick her into retirement. Once a person gets like that and they were in a position of power, they regard everyone as stupid children interfering with their life. I just was in a support group meeting for dealing with stubborn elderly parents. I’m trying to keep her safe, it’s hard to do.

600 days???

Doesn’t look a day younger than 87. Public service really becomes self service after a certain age.

r8 That's because work is their entire life. This fucker, mentioned at r5, was actively hearing cases until a month before his death. He was so steeped in law his entire life that in his old age he just became law. More automaton than human.

This is no way to live. There’s more to life than work. Especially if it isn’t even your own business, even then in which case GET A LIFE.

Another flaw in our supposedly wonderful Constitution. Per the NYT, the average life expectancy in 1787 was 36 years old.

There needs to be a national mandatory retirement age for judges at 65. All judges, including SCOTUS. Pass a constitutional amendment.

I think a retirement age of 70 is fair. People who are 55 or60 now won’t receive Social Security until they are 67 and it will likely be later for millennials.

Where were her family and friends? Poor old gal. Too bad she couldn't end her career with dignity.

R15, the U.S. court system might not work if that happened, though. The reason senior judges still hear cases is their help is actually needed. We're a litigation-prone, contentious society. We need more judges and probably more courts. Good luck getting Congress to focus on that, of course.

[quote]600 days???

Oh, yeah. That is not shocking to anyone who has done appellate and post-conviction work. I had some cases where trial judges never ruled on motions that were several years old. By the time someone filed a new motion to revive the case the judge was often retired and sometimes dead. And then there are some judges who are just notoriously slow in issuing opinions. In those instances the Chief Judge and the other members of the bench will have to step in as the judges on the Federal Circuit court did in this case. Though this does seem to be an extreme example.

[quote] There needs to be a national mandatory retirement age for judges at 65.

There is already a great incentive for judges to retire at age 65 and certainly by age 70, because they can retire on their full salary without having to work any longer, and many do. Often they will hear cases as “senior” judges who deal with about 15 percent of the federal judicial workload, which is not insignificant. Generally, they handle matters that just slow down the caseloads of regular serving judges, so they serve an important function. The problems arise when people have stayed on well beyond the time they should have called it quits entirely.

[quote] The "Rule of 80" is the commonly used shorthand for the age and service requirement for a judge to assume senior status, as set forth in Title 28 of the US. Code, Section 371(c). Beginning at age 65, a judge may retire at his or her current salary or take senior status after performing 15 years of active service as an Article III judge (65+15 = 80). A sliding scale of increasing age and decreasing service results in eligibility for retirement compensation at age 70 with a minimum of 10 years of service (70+10=80). Senior judges, who essentially provide volunteer service to the courts, typically handle about 15 percent of the federal courts' workload annually.

Seems made up, all the 95 year olds I know are sharp as a tack

At least she didnt wet her pants on the bench like Thurgood Marshall.

[quote] Another flaw in our supposedly wonderful Constitution. Per the NYT, the average life expectancy in 1787 was 36 years old.

Well, sort of. That average was due to very high child mortality rates. If you made it out of adolescence you could expect to live well into your 50s. The constitution says you have to be at least 35 to serve as president.

Good point, R22. but they never envisioned 95-year-olds on the bench. Or women or Blacks, etc.

I'm not in favor of mandatory federal judicial or Senate retirement particularly when it's advocated by shallow opportunists like Nikki Haley. Age doesn't always bring wisdom and compassion but it can. Ill health is something that deepens empathy and life experience. I would hope to create the social pressure to get obviously unfit people of all ages out of public service but it's difficult to do so if you're not a voter in that district and, of course, impossible to do so with the federal judiciary..

Just not a fan of broad stroke solutions.

Civil servants have a mandatory retirement age for a reason, judges should be no exception to that. The lifer system you have in the US for the judiciary is obviously anomalous and a result of solutions from centuries ago that haven't been updated for whatever political reason. There's no need to start excusing it with some nonsense about wisdom or whatever.

No one over 80 should hold any office in the federal government.

This problem is only going to become more severe. In future decades we won’t be taking about nonagenarians clinging to their lifetime appointments, but centenarians.

I think she's fabulous.

Yes Diane, at least this one shows up. How many judicial appointments have the Democrats failed to clear in the Senate because YOU weren't there to vote?