Judge Edith Jones Subject To Ethics Complaint Over Alleged Bizarre Comments At Federalist Society Meeting And Judicial Bias

Edith-Jones-Judge-Edith-H-Jones-Edith-Hollan-JonesThere have long been complaints about the temperament and civility of Judge Edith Jones of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Indeed, when I clerked on that court, Jones was rather infamous for her run-ins with colleagues and others.  Jones has been criticized for her extremely conservative views and, more importantly, her perceived intolerance (and hostility) for opposing views and colleagues.  This includes telling another judge to “shut up” in oral argument. Now, she is facing a formal complaint over a Federalist Society speech given at the University of Pennsylvania where she allegedly said that certain racial groups are predisposed to crime and that defenses like mental competence and actual innocence are “red herrings” among other bizarre claims.


Various law professors, ethics experts, and groups are behind the complaint. Since there was no recording allowed and no transcript, this extraordinary complaint was filed with declarations on what Jones states.

Jones’ comments occurred at a lecture entitled “Federal Death Penalty Review” at the University of Pennsylvania School of Law on February 20, 2013.

The complaints lists a controversial tenure of what are described as unprofessional and hostile conduct toward others. The most recent speech described as including the following statements:

*The United States system of justice provides a positive service to capital-case defendants by imposing a death sentence, because the defendants are likely to make peace with God only in the moment before imminent execution;

*Certain “racial groups like African Americans and Hispanics are predisposed to crime,” are “‘prone’ to commit acts of violence,” and get involved in more violent and “heinous” crimes than people of other ethnicities;

*Claims of racism, innocence, arbitrariness, and international standards are simply “red herrings” used by opponents of capital punishment;

*Capital defendants who raise claims of “mental retardation” abuse the system;

*The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins v. Virginia prohibiting execution of persons who are “mentally retarded” was ill-advised and created a “slippery slope”;

*Mexican Nationals would prefer to be on death row in the United States rather than in prison in Mexico;

*The country of Mexico does not provide and would not provide the legal protections that a Mexican National facing a death sentence in the United States would receive.

The complaint is based on The Judicial Conduct and Disability Act allowing “[a]ny person alleging that a judge has engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts” to file a complaint against the judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 351(a). Among the cited canons is Canon 2 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges providing that “a judge should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities.”

As someone who has both defended and charged federal judges in cases of misconduct, this complaint is impressive — an extraordinary collection of allegations that will test the often criticized ability of the federal courts to police themselves. Some of these statements attributed to Jones are quite bizarre like the suggestion of the death penalty as necessary to bring defendants closer to God (though that statement could have been made in jest or sarcasm).

In the past, I have been in an uncomfortable position as a legal commentator when Jones was suggested as a top candidate for the Supreme Court during the prior Bush Administration. Her poor reputation among some judges and lawyers is difficult to explain and remains highly personal or impressionistic. However, this complaint shows that her critics have increased and some of her comments offer a potential objective basis for discipline. To what extent is a judge allowed to express such views as a matter for free speech? Canon 4 states that a judge may engage in “extrajudicial activities, including lecturing on both law-related and nonlegal subjects.” This is followed with the caveat that “a judge should not participate in extrajudicial activities that detract from the dignity of the judge’s office [or] reflect adversely on the judge’s impartiality . . . .”

Notably, the complaint includes a request for a transfer to another circuit for adjudication under Rule 26, which states that “[s]uch transfers may be appropriate . . . where the issues are highly visible and a local disposition may weaken public confidence . . . .”

Many conservatives are likely to find statements from some liberal jurists equally disturbing. Even if these statements cross the line, what is the appropriate sanction. It seems doubtful that anything other than a reprimand would result. That is assuming that there is no question of false statements made in the course of any investigation. If Jones denies these statements, it could create a more serious question for the court if it concludes that the statements were made. If the statements were found to have been made by Jones, the question then becomes a difficult line between free speech and judicial impropriety. Ironically, Jones has never been a strong supporter of such constitutional rights as a judge but may now need to argue for a more expansive meaning.

What do you think? Should judges be allowed to discuss such views in public as a matter of free speech?

Here is the complaint: JonesComplaint_060413

66 thoughts on “Judge Edith Jones Subject To Ethics Complaint Over Alleged Bizarre Comments At Federalist Society Meeting And Judicial Bias

  1. Whether I agree or not I will point out that DOJ statistics verify her claims largely. Are we to assume that statistics are racist?

  2. “If the statements were found to have been made by Jones, the question then becomes a difficult line between free speech and judicial impropriety. Ironically, Jones has never been a strong supporter of such constitutional rights as a judge but may now need to argue for a more expansive meaning.”

    That’s simply delicious.

  3. Wow…… crossing the line? Her beliefs are so prejudicial she has no business judging anyone. How can someone with these stated views not be removed? Post haste!

  4. Ditto Bob….. Geeze… Where does common sence come to play…. Or when is it ok to take a vacation….

  5. It’s going to be obvious why IANAL when I say this I suppose, but for me, this statement –

    Claims of racism, innocence, arbitrariness, and international standards are simply “red herrings” used by opponents of capital punishment;

    constitutes prima facie evidence of unsuitability to serve as a judge. Sorta reminds me of Scalia – didn’t he say that “mere innocence” shouldn’t get in the way of a duly imposed Death sentence?

  6. In the sports world is is commonly claimed that black athletes are superior due to genetics such as larger tendons etc etc. I wonder what everyone’s thoughts are on that as well. Do you believe that to be true?

    As a society we are rather incapable of having rational unbiased discussions on anything racial. People are either dismissive or inventive.

  7. This judge’s incredibly casual attitude about the issuance of death upon human beings indicates a complete lack of consciousness or humanity. Horrible and chilling. It reminds me of Scalia and Thomas. Part of our tripartite government in action.

  8. My understanding is that at least two people attending her speech independently confirmed what she said. Do you know how many of those who were there have confirmed her statements?

  9. Edith Jones would have never been invited to speak at the American Constitution Society. The conservative students belong to the Federalist Society. Good on them for being shocked by the statements made by the old racist Texas republican and to think Bush considered her for the Supreme Court. She won’t leave because Obama would probably replace her with a liberal attorney and quite possibly one from the minority community.

  10. G. Mason: Let’s agree that there is a disparity in crime rates between whites and minorities. It is still a fact that a person of color is more likely to be arrested, prosecuted for a felony rather than a misdemeanor, poorly represented, convicted against the evidence, and sent to prison rather than being fined or given community service than a white person would be for the same crime.

    You can only account for those facts by recognizing the bias in our criminal justice system represented by Edith Jones. And larger tendons simply are not relevant.

  11. What I find interesting is that Professor Turley didn’t mention if her ‘speech or verbal thoughts’ were evident in any of her court cases or decisions? This would be nice to know, and can provide a connection or link between what she said in this speech and how she decided cases as a judge? Do we have any of her court cases, portraying this connection?

  12. Wouldn’t the “conservative” path (with the greatest return on taxpayer investment) be to invest in education, jobs, police officers on the street and infrastructure in the inner-cities and poor rural areas instead of the “punitive” mindset like this judge? She is just a symptom of the larger disease.

  13. If elected politicians can make such talk as this judge has been said to do I don’t see why judges cannot.

    Additionally, she could have the most outlandish personal opinions imaginable but if she does not let her personal opinions affect her administration of justice there is no issue here.

  14. Mr Benjamin, there is not a simple disparity, there is a mountain of difference.

    Most of the DOJ stats are very very rarely displayed by the US Media because they are terrified of discussing anything racial that does not involve the defense of minorities and that paints them in a bad light.

    The reality is the crime figures among them are absurdly out of whack. No amount of sugar coating can hide that fact.

    For example, HALF of the population inside California’s prisons are illegal hispanics. Half. Not only are they of one race, they are also not even citizens of this country.

    Instead of seeing no evil it is time we discuss it and drag it out into the light and figure out how we can rectify the issue. It is also time to lay to rest the political correct method of labeling this a societal and judicial bigotry towards minorities. That excuse is simply unacceptable and only serves to tarnish any meaningful work towards actual solutions.

  15. “In a detailed affidavit, James McCormack, a legal ethicist, former general counsel and chief disciplinary counsel for the State Bar of Texas, writes that the content of Jones’ speech violates a number of ethical provisions within the judicial code of conduct – including the duty to be impartial; to avoid comment on pending, or impending cases; to be respectful and “avoid comment or behavior that could be interpreted as harassment, prejudice or bias,”; and to avoid participating in “extrajudicial activities that detract from the dignity” of the judge’s office or would “reflect adversely on the judge’s impartiality.” In sum, McCormack concluded that Jones has engaged in “cognizable misconduct,” he wrote. “Her inflammatory remarks evince bias and prejudice and serve to lower public confidence in our judiciary,” reads the affidavit. “I view this episode as a very sad and unfortunate chapter in the history of our federal judiciary. Most federal judges strive mightily to act fairly and impartially and to strengthen, rather than erode, public confidence in our system of justice,” he continued. “Judge Jones’s conduct militates in the opposite direction. In my opinion, unless an appropriate disciplinary authority strongly disapproves of … Jones’s statements and properly addresses her flagrant misconduct, our judicial system – and our federal appellate courts in particular – will suffer the consequences of diminished public respect and confidence.” Austin Statesman

  16. Just remember in your quest for a witch hunt on speech that the tables can turn on you eventually as well as Mr Turley noted above.

    I am not sure what she said was really anything to be up in arms over.

  17. The various decisions on First Amendment Retaliation do limit speech in a work context. It seems to me that the judicial canons restrict the parameters of judicial speech. The form of judgments, what they include and don’t include, is supposed to be regulated too.

  18. “Esteemed Mr. Rodríguez:

    We are aware that you have been an outstanding, hard working individual and good parent. You have broken immigration laws and request a penalty. However, since your appearance/ethnicity is similar to others (drug dealers, murderers, rapists) I am hereby denying your request for sanctions to get right with the law. You cannot have a Path to Citizenship, because of actions by others (they sin, you pay). This court has decided to ignore the Constitution (specially the 14th. Amendment which covers profiling) and instead follow the guidance of forum posters and Hate Groups”.

    It is hereby ordered.

    BANG!

    -The Immigration Judge

  19. G.Mason#1 – Whether I agree or not I will point out that DOJ statistics verify her claims largely. Are we to assume that statistics are racist?

    G.Mason#2 – As a society we are rather incapable of having rational unbiased discussions on anything racial.

    As Mark Twain noted, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

    I submit that G.Mason’s spewing of statistics without addressing causality exemplifies one who is incapable of having rational unbiased discussions on anything racial.

    A quick review of any of the number of comments on this blog re the drug war and the prison industry reveals government policies which reek of racist animus

    I fear Mr. G.Mason didn’t eat his Cheerios this morning

  20. Her comments were clearly delusional if the reports are true, as in:

    “*The United States system of justice provides a positive service to capital-case defendants by imposing a death sentence, because the defendants are likely to make peace with God only in the moment before imminent execution;”

    “*Capital defendants who raise claims of “mental retardation” abuse the system;”

    “*Mexican Nationals would prefer to be on death row in the United States rather than in prison in Mexico;”

    If you believe in any of those three statements above then I would assert you are also delusional.

    G. Mason as to your raw statistics I would answer this:

    http://jonathanturley.org/2011/11/26/the-incarceration-of-black-men-in-america/

  21. G, Mason: “Mr Benjamin, there is not a simple disparity, there is a mountain of difference.”

    None of this “mountain of evidence” and none of the points in your post address or counter the specific points I made about disparate treatment of whites and minorities by the justice system in dealing with individual crimes. I would like to see the “mountain of evidence” that disproves them, instead of the straw-man of “political correctness”.

  22. I don’t see how such hateful bias can not hurt regard for the judicial system (which has a lot of problems.). Based on her arrogance, I also don’t see that she would keep that bias out of the courtroom. A study of the cases she adjudicated should be made.

  23. One reason that judges are so seldom sanctioned is that the winners in adjudications before them don’t want to re open or re examine anything decided in their favor. I think that DoJ didn’t /doesn’t want to re examine anything Judge Edward Nottingham did.

  24. What do you think? Should judges be allowed to discuss such views in public as a matter of free speech?

    She should be impeached.

  25. “What do you think? Should judges be allowed to discuss such views in public as a matter of free speech?”

    ***************************

    Personally, I think they should be given free rein –even encouraged. We need a basis to impeach these kooks in black and what better way than with their own verbal diarrhea?

  26. She kind of barks like a Pittbull. I wonder if she would be for banning Pitt Bulls or in favor of Pitt Bulls. People who judge all dogs of one breed and say they are all bad are like this judge. She should not be a judge if she is against Pitt Bulls.

  27. There are people out there that think that women should stay at home and not be lawyers, doctors or Indian Chiefs. They think like her. What comes around, goes around lady. Get off the bench and go tend to the grandkids.

  28. From NY Times:

    Just 44 percent of Americans approve of the job the Supreme Court is doing and three-quarters say the justices’ decisions are sometimes influenced by their personal or political views, according to a poll conducted by The New York Times and CBS News.

    Those findings are a fresh indication that the court’s standing with the public has slipped significantly in the past quarter-century, according to surveys conducted by several polling organizations. Approval was as high as 66 percent in the late 1980s, and by 2000 approached 50 percent.

    The decline in the court’s standing may stem in part from Americans’ growing distrust in recent years of major institutions in general and the government in particular. But it also could reflect a sense that the court is more political, after the ideologically divided 5-to-4 decisions in Bush v. Gore, which determined the 2000 presidential election, and Citizens United, the 2010 decision allowing unlimited campaign spending by corporations and unions.

    Smart people, those Americans.

  29. Tis said about the courthouse that when she was in High School she was nicknamed Edith Retard because she made fun of “retards” on a school bus. Any truth to this? Inquiring dogs want to know.

  30. I agree with Gene that Mespo said it all!
    This judge is out of control.
    Swarthmore,
    If we could only force the Supremes to live by the same ethics rules as the rest of the federal judges are subject to!

  31. I have been in her courtroom several times. I have never seen her smile. The picture above has a smile of sorts. Was it enhanced? Maybe she is just having a bad life. Can’t we cut a little slack for someone who is having a bad life?

  32. I think her statements qualify as free speech, bizarre though her speech may be. In a way, she’s actually an “honest” judge becauses she has disclosed how she really feels about certain matters and has displayed her particular judicial biases. Let’s face it, a LOT of judges have biases on such issues in one direction or another; they just don’t generally divulge them in public speech.

  33. Ten Things You Should Know About The Federal Judge Accused Of Racism
    By Ian Millhiser
    Jun 5, 2013
    http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/06/05/2108181/ten-things-you-should-know-about-the-federal-judge-accused-of-racism/

    Excerpt:
    1. Edith Jones Waved Off Horrific Sexual Harassment

    A paper mill worker named Susan Waltman’s supervisor told her to have sex with a co-worker, “pinched her buttocks with pliers and tried to put his hands in her back pockets,” and fellow employees hung used tampons from their lockers. When she complained to a manager, she was told she should “expect this type of behavior working with men.” After she complained, an employee of another company that worked in the mill grabbed her arm while she was carrying a vial of hot liquid, and another worker stuck his tongue in her ear. One of her co-workers told her “he would cut off her breast and shove it down her throat.” He later dangled her over a stairwell thirty feet above the floor. Though she met with senior managers about these incidents, the harassment continued. At one point, a co-worker “grabbed Waltman’s breasts and directed a high pressure hose at her crotch.”

    Judge Jones wrote a dissenting opinion claiming that this woman’s sexual harassment suit should be thrown out.

    2. Edith Jones Thinks Victims Of Employment Discrimination Should ‘”Take A Better Second Job Instead Of Bringing Suit”

    In a speech at the University of Texas, Jones claimed that employment discrimination suits “seldom turn on evidence of race- or sex-based discrimination” and generally involve “petty interoffice disputes, recrimination, second-guessing and suspicion.” She advised workers claiming discrimination to “[t]ake a better second job instead of bringing suit,” according to the Houston Chronicle.

    3. Edith Jones Thinks A Man Whose Lawyer Slept Through Much Of His Trial Should Be Executed

    Judge Jones joined an opinion holding that a capital defendant could be executed despite the fact that his lawyer slept through much of his trial. Though that opinion was eventually reversed by the full Fifth Circuit, Jones dissented from that reversal.

  34. Mespo, you cite the following: “Just 44 percent of Americans approve of the job the Supreme Court is doing and three-quarters say the justices’ decisions are sometimes influenced by their personal or political views, according to a poll conducted by The New York Times and CBS News.” Later, you conclude with “Smart people, those Americans.”

    This poll is encouraging in that it demonstrates that Americans are starting to get it. But 44% approval is still way too high. And only 75% agreeing that the justices’ decisions are SOMETIMES influened by political considerations is way too low.

    However, let’s not quibble; an improvement in reality perception is an improvement nonetheless.

  35. Some of her comments are correct, perhaps most of them. Mental competance is a red herring, though its no improvement to be locked up in a mental ward with evil psychiatrists & their nurses forcing their will on you. I’ve heard US prisons are only slightly better &, of course, they are more populated than any other country in the world by about ten times. (its relevant since status quo is not the answer). Race issues are very delecate but I know I have a better chance if I leave my car unlocked in Wyoming than in southern California & Baltimore, at least in part due to the ethnicity. We whites are messed up in other ways & all races have many plus points including mine. On the death penalty, I think it should be used more often where the guilt is certain. That might preclude a bunch of Texas states until they get their act together. But it should be quick & almost immediate. That way it saves millions & even does the heinous criminal a favor by giving him a chance to start again with a clean slate. When I see evil things like the Taliban chopping off the arms & legs of women they dissapprove of, or some of these shootings & bombings of inocent people, my first reaction is to want to do similarly to them. Then I realize the ‘justice dispenser’ would quickly degenerate to their level, after a couple of mistakes were made. So then it best to quickly dispose of the really heinous criminal & empty our prisons of lesser criminals or mislabeled criminals. I love the hispanic race; their family values are generally better than most whites; but I did not miss the fact that otherwise law abiding families took shopping carts into the sacked stores in L A during the South Central riots.

  36. http://www.diffen.com/difference/Ethnicity_vs_Race

    My opening statement: “Race does not exist, it’s definition is a bunch of crap”.

    With just a bit of extra common sense, I will say “I know a guy” that has refused to check any box on the census form indicating his “race”.
    This guy would be eager to be dragged into court for his refusal and hear the court and justice system define the term race.
    Race is a construct of feeble mind think from the past mountains of feeble mind think. We have a battery of new knowledge, new tests, new understandings. Much the same as Darwins theory of Evolution was (and still is) rejected, his theory grows stronger every year and IMO is 100% valid. It is time for the scientist, sociologist, and enlightened people of the world to give up this strawman of race.
    The term ethnicity which is covered in this link should have a light shined on it too.
    Cultural environment is truly a valid reason for how an individuals views, conceptions, ethics, are formed. Family traditions, religious beliefs, and congruity effects how an individual grows and perceives the world.
    Skin eye and hair color are nothing but melanin content, and absorption of different light rays. All scientific evidence speaks to the truth of this.
    We use this false term “RACE” based on the prejudice and ignorance of our ancestors. It is time to call out this Bull-Loney and confront the sickness and mind set of it’s use.
    My ending statement,: think of how the term is used, weigh the negative ways it is used versus the positive. I will argue even the few (if any) positive ways are really negative. Race is just deflection, and excuse, a strawman conveniently used to justify ignoring the imbalance of opportunity among all the peeples of the world.
    Now I’m done. Thank you. PS I am sincere, I know that doesn’t make me right, but I sure am eager for the census bureau to call my “friend” out on this one. :o)

  37. Fast forward to the year 2027 and Justice Jones is in conference with her cohorts regarding a denial of counsel case. Here is what she says directly to Justice Sotomayor and to Uncle Clarence: Certain “racial groups like African Americans and Hispanics are predisposed to crime,” are “‘prone’ to commit acts of violence,” and get involved in more violent and “heinous” crimes than people of other ethnicities;

  38. Fastforward to 2017 and President Marco Rubio has been caught stealing from the plate at Xmas Eve Mass in the National Cathedral. Justice Jones says to her fellow Justices: Certain “racial groups like African Americans and Hispanics are predisposed to crime,” are “‘prone’ to commit acts of violence,” and get involved in more violent and “heinous” crimes than people of other ethnicities;
    If President Rubio took some money out of the plate at church as it passed by then simply prone to it.

  39. According to a 2011 Obama Administration report:

    “Based on available data from 1980 to 2008—

    “Blacks were disproportionately represented as both homicide victims and offenders.…The offending rate for blacks (34.4 per 100,000) was almost 8 times higher than the rate for whites (4.5 per 100,000).”

    http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf

    Sounds like Judge Jones’ big crime is telling the truth.

  40. Lawyers should never ask a Georgia grandma a question if they aren’t
    prepared for the answer.
    In a trial, a Southern small-town prosecuting attorney called his first
    witness, a grandmotherly, elderly woman to the stand. He approached her
    and asked, ‘Mrs. Jones, do you know me?’ She responded, ‘Why, yes, I do
    know you, Mr. Williams. I’ve known you since you were a boy, and frankly,
    you’ve been a big disappointment to me. You lie, you cheat on your wife,
    and you manipulate people and talk about them behind their backs. You
    think you’re a big shot when you haven’t the brains to realize you’ll never
    amount to anything more than a two-bit paper pusher. Yes, I know you.’
    The lawyer was stunned. Not knowing what else to do, he pointed across
    the room and asked, ‘Mrs. Jones, do you know the defense attorney?’
    She again replied, ‘Why yes, I do. I’ve known Mr. Bradley since he was a
    youngster, too. He’s lazy, bigoted, and he has a drinking problem. He can’t
    build a normal relationship with anyone, and his law practice is one of the
    worst in the entire state. Not to mention he cheated on his wife with three
    different women. One of them was your wife. Yes, I know him.’
    The defense attorney nearly died.
    The judge asked both counselors to approach the bench and, in a very
    quiet voice, said,
    ‘If either of you idiots asks her if she knows me, I’ll send you both to the
    electric chair.

  41. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2336647/The-terrifying-moment-crazed-woman-throws-rocks-wields-baseball-bat-sends-pit-bulls-reporter.html

    A terrifying video of the incident shows Lawrence throwing a rock at them, wielding a bat, screaming ‘Get away from me,’ and directing her two pit bulls to attack.

    The dogs then chased down 24-year-old reporter Abbey Niezgoda and bit her on her forearm before Lawrence called them back.

    In the video, Lawrence, who is black, also could be heard yelling racial slurs at Niezgoda, who is white.

  42. Steve Sailer: I read the same report, Here’s what you may have missed. Homicide rates for both blacks and whites are overwhelmingly INTRAracial – 84% of whites killed by whites, 93% blacks killed by blacks. You can’t live between Philadelphia and New York, watch the nightly news on both and not know how many black-on-black killings there are in both cities.

    But homicides alone cannot account for the disparity or justify Jones’ beliefs. They are simply too small a part of total crime statistics to account for the disparity.

    Multiple studies for decades have shown that when the crime is against a white person, the wrong black person is more likely to be convicted than the wrong white person. More to the point are less violent crimes, especially drug possession. If you are a member of a minority, you are more likely to be prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned for a felony than a misdemeanor than if you are white. Other than homicide, for the same crimes, white kids are more likely to get slapped on the wrist while black kids are more likely to go to prison. If you can disprove that, please proceed.

  43. She is common. But worse, she is commonplace. An ignorant, powerful, emotionally disturbed judge in charge of other people’s lives. Ho hum…

    Get off the bench and go tend to the grandkids.

    Ugh no! The only thing that can possibly avert the ruin that is coming to us is having good-enough parents and good-enough caretakers for our puppies so that the young will be able to manage their own lives better than the judges of our time manage the justice system.

  44. If you understand what the word “predisposed” means, then you can’t argue that the judge is not biased. Saying that you believe a member of a group is predisposed to commit a crime means that you have pre-judged the liklihood that the person is guilty of having committed a crime of which he or she is accused.

    Interestingly, people are found of claiming that “minorities” committ more “crime” than whites, but these claims tends to break down upon closer inspection. Whites use illegal drugs more often than non-whites in this country. Every such use is a crime. But the police are not looking for drug dealers in suburbia, so the drug trade there goes on largely unobstructed. Indeed, that is where the bulk of drug demand comes from. But as a recent ACLU study illustrated, laws against possession of illegal drugs are enforced in a wildly racially biased way – almost to the point of constitutiing black codes (codes that criminalize behavior for blacks but not for whites).

    Also, crimes like pedophilia, especially those involving rings of people who trade in child pornography and trade children are disproportionately carried out by white males. Does it follow that white males are “pre-disposed” to be pedophiles? Only an imbecile would think so.
    And this judge is exactly that – an imbecile who is not fit to sit in judgement of anyone on any matter.

  45. I have followed the periodic stories of this woman’s tirades, tantrums and tyrannies. There is no reason to mince words. She is a common bigot, intemperate, disrespectful and self-absorbed. She possesses neither the emotional nor intellectual maturity we have the right to expect from a judge. She is, in short, an embarrassment to everyone except, apparently, herself. Since she is unlikely to resign, she ought to at least recuse herself from all cases involving blacks, Hispanics, gays and the mentally ill. And if we were to inquire further, we would likely discover that she is not particularly fond of Muslims or Catholics either. It is regrettable that we must continue to be plagued by this festering boil on the judiciary’s backside.

  46. “Festering boil on the judiciary’s backside”? Now that paints a picture. Tell us how you really feel, Mike. :mrgreen:

    I have to agree though. She’s an embarrassment to both bar and bench. The good news is is that as such behavior on her part becomes more publicized and available on the web, it guarantees she’ll be hit with more Motions to Recuse that if not granted could amount to reversible error.

  47. Gene H.:

    I may at times be a teensy bit intemperate my own self. And I confess to some particular annoyance in the fact that Judge Bush and I are both alums of U.T. Law School and the Texas Law Review. But I believe that she is an example of what we get on the bench when we favor rigid ideology over intellectual depth, narrow specialization over broad experience and political connections over commitment to public service. Another Ronald Reagan disaster.

  48. seamus: “Her husband’s name is Woody Jones. I just thought you should know that.
    ~+~

    Graham Chapman: “There’s a good woody sort of word, ‘sausage’. ‘Gorn.’…..Vole … ‘Woody Jones’.”

  49. @G.Mason: “For example, HALF of the population inside California’s prisons are illegal hispanics. Half. Not only are they of one race, they are also not even citizens of this country.”

    The statistics I found indicate that all immigrants, legal or illegal, regardless of race, make up 17% of California’s prison population vs 35% of the total state population. A US born man in California is over twice as likely to be in prison as a foreign born man.

    Source is http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/cacounts/CC_208KBCC.pdf

    Can I ask where you got your statistics?

  50. UPDATE: Edith Jones, Federal Judge, Faces Rare Supreme Court-Ordered Review Over Alleged Racist Remarks

    “Judge Edith Jones of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will be subjected to a rarely used disciplinary review process to address alleged racist and discriminatory comments made earlier this year.

    In a letter released Thursday, Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts determined that the accusations against Jones, a conservative judge based in New Orleans, should be heard in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

    ‘I have selected the Judicial Council of the District of Columbia Circuit to accept the transfer and to exercise the powers of a judicial council with respect to the identified complaint and any pending or new complaints relating to the same subject matter,’ Roberts wrote.”

Comments are closed.