“Though some investigative conduct might trigger Fourth Amendment concerns and even constitute violations of an individual’s privacy rights, Judge Newman has not shown that every application of the provision offends the Fourth Amendment,” Judge Cooper stated.
The judge also rejected Judge Newman’s challenge to the law’s provision that it applies to judges who cannot discharge their duties due to mental or physical disability. Judge Newman claimed that this language fails to provide adequate notice of what constitutes a disability or when penalties may apply. Judge Cooper held that the law “is not unconstitutionally vague.”
Judicial Conduct and Disability Act Upheld
The law only applies to federal judges, and Judge Cooper emphasized that judges are well aware of their duties, as they must swear an oath to “faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon” them before taking office.
“Because the provision is pegged to ‘knowable criteria,’ it is not impermissibly vague,” Judge Cooper wrote. He also concluded that the law “merely sets the outer boundaries” of how an investigation may proceed, addressing Judge Newman’s argument that the law does not provide fair notice of when penalties will be imposed.
Legal Representation and Case Information
An attorney for Judge Newman and a representative of the Federal Circuit could not immediately be reached for comment on Tuesday. Judge Newman is represented by Gregory Dolin and John J. Vecchione of the New Civil Liberties Alliance. The Federal Circuit is represented by Michael Andrew Zee and Stephen Ehrlich of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Division.
