President Donald Trump has been criticized by Democrats and Republicans alike for his recent spate of pardons, including corrupt ex-congressmen and the father of Jared Kushner. I was one of those who immediately criticized those pardons as manifestly unjustified and inimical to our legal system. However, none of that makes the comments of senior U.S. District Judge Robert Pratt of the Southern District of Iowa any less troubling. Judge Pratt gave an interview slamming the pardons in a departure from judicial ethics rules barring jurists from engaging in such political commentary.
I have previously criticized Judge Emmet Sullivan for using his courtroom to air grievances against President Trump. Platt however dispensed with any pretense of judicial function in airing his grievances over the pardons. He told the Associated Press that “It’s not surprising that a criminal like Trump pardons other criminals. But apparently to get a pardon, one has to be either a Republican, a convicted child murderer or a turkey.”
Pratt was discussing pardons that included former Ron Paul campaign chairman Jesse Benton and campaign manager John Tate, who were convicted at trial of concealing $73,000 in payments that went to a state senator. Again, my concern with the comments is not the merits but the messenger.
Pratt was appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1997 and remains an active judge on a reduced docket as a senior status judge. As such, he remains subject to the Code of Judicial Ethics. State judges have been sanctioned for yielding to such temptations to vent their opposition or criticism to Trump. Federal judges however have engaged in such public commentary without sanctions.
Pratt’s comments raise serious questions under three of the most basic canons of judicial ethics barring judges from engaging in political activities and positions:
CANON 1
A judge shall uphold and promote the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.CANON 3
A judge shall conduct the judge’s personal and extrajudicial activities to minimize the risk of conflict with the obligations of judicial office.CANON 4
A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality of the judiciary.
Calling the President of the United States a criminal and denouncing pardons would seem overtly engaging in a political commentary or activity. It is a troubling dismissal of the long-standing avoidance of such commentary by judges to preserve judicial impartiality.
Making it worse is the fact that Pratt was involved in Sorenson’s case. He sentenced him to 15 months in prison in 2017 — a surprising departure from the recommended probation of the prosecutors due to Sorenson’s guilty plea and cooperation. Indeed, Sorenson helped convict Benton, Tate and former Paul deputy campaign manager Dimitri Kesari. His sentencing was troubling for many of us in the defense bar because the recommendation for probation was consistent with past cooperation cases. Pratt’s sentence was not. Nevertheless, the sentence was within his discretion.
A federal judge has every right to sentence defendants harshly for conduct that they believe warrant added punishment. However, that should be the full extent of their role. They are not grand inquisitors who continue to hound or condemn defendants. They are certainly not appropriate figures to denounce such individuals if they secure commutations or pardons. This is not a personal vendetta and judges should not be seen as wiping up public sentiments against previously sentenced defendants. Even once a judge leaves the bench, I would argue for continued reticence in making such public comments. However, Pratt has not left the bench. He is still hearing cases while engaging in political commentary.
Much like Judge Sullivan’s use of his final order to condemn former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, this is a gratuitous and injudicious act. Indeed, Pratt is more troubling than Sullivan’s as commentary outside of the courtroom. Republicans and even Trump associates could well come before Pratt in future cases — facing a jurist who gives public interviews to denounce Trump as a criminal.
Not surprisingly, there has been little beyond praise for Pratt. Call it another example of Trumpunity in our age of rage and hypocrisy. Legal ethicists and experts stretched ethical rules to the breaking point to support actions against Republican lawyers for filing election challenges. Yet, they are again conspicuously silent on these controversy. Indeed, many Democrats recently denounced public comments by Justice Samuel Alito but have no criticism of Pratt or liberal jurists like the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in far more serious public comments.
What Pratt said publicly was wrong. It undermines not just his credibility but that of his court and his other colleagues.
Turley is righteously indignant about a comment made by some unknown US District judge but he’s willing to forgive Trump for calling Joe Biden & his kin “a criminal enterprise” & “an organized crime family.”
JT cites the basic canons of judicial ethics but is conspicuously silent as Trump tries to undermine the credibility of Supreme Court justices by publicly labelling them “totally incompetent and weak on the massive Election Fraud that took place in the 2020 Presidential Election.” Trump & his attorneys have relentlessly attacked Republican governors, state officials, federal judges, Bill Barr, the Trump Justice department & Homeland Security officials for repeatedly verifying that Biden won a free & fair election. Unsurprisingly, JT attacks anyone who dares criticizes Trump’s legal team for refusing to accept 59 judicial rulings which confirmed election results. To this day, Trump & his attorneys claim he won in a landslide.
Turley is the poster boy for partisan rage & hypocrisy.
Our judges are worthless. And it’s important to tell the truth about them.
Trump isn’t a criminal. Nor is he a judge.
Trump isn’t a criminal like Jack the Ripper wasn’t a criminal.
What a dumb-a.ss
Indeed you are.
Here we are a year later and Biden’s criminal enterprise is evident. There’s a difference between the president saying something and a JUDGE!
FROM LINKED ARTICLE:
“Sorenson was an up-and-coming conservative, and he made news when he defected as Michele Bachmann’s campaign chairman to endorse Paul days before the 2012 caucuses. Paul’s campaign and Sorenson denied that any money would change hands. Only later did the public learn that Paul’s campaign secretly paid Sorenson, routing the money through a film production company as “audio/visual expenses” to conceal its true nature on disclosure reports”.
Edited From: “Federal Judge In Iowa Ridicules Trump Pardons”
The Independent, 12/28/20
He could have made more money by being on Biden’s coattails.
REGARDING ABOVE:
This post is from the blog troll masquerading as a long-absent commenter. Several times per day the blog troll engages in dirty tricks on these comment threads.
4000 people filed change of address forms with the US Postal Service indicating they are no longer residents of two counties in Georgia. County election boards voted to remove them from the voter rolls. The case came before sister of Stacey Abrams – a federal judge – and she was asked to recuse herself from the case. Instead, she declined to recuse herself and decided that even though the people have told the US Postal Service they have moved, they can still vote from their old address.
Looks like Democrats are going to steal Georgia, too.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/28/georgia-voter-rolls-senate-451820
Until Conservatives out-do ANTIFA with threats, riots and intimidation, nothing is going to stop the Left
The judge “concluded that the counties appeared to have improperly relied on unverified change-of-address data to invalidate registrations in the two counties.”
“The evidence to challenge the 4,000 registrations in Muscogee County was particularly sparse. The challenge was lodged Dec. 14 by a local voter named Ralph Russell who alleged that he had compared evidence from publicly accessible voter registration databases to prove that these voters had moved out of Georgia. “I believe that each of the individuals named … as a result of registering their name and change of address to a location outside of Muscogee County, removed to another state with the intention of making the new state their residence,” Russell told the county board. … The Muscogee board met Dec. 16 and backed Russell’s motion 3-1, even though he didn’t attend the meeting and provided no additional evidence to support his challenge.”
Did you even read the article?
BTW, they still have to be a legal resident of GA and otherwise legally eligible to vote in GA, or they can be charged with fraud.
The left seems unconcerned by fraud charges. It’s like they have a get out of jail free card.
Maybe that’s because very few people commit voter fraud, and of those few, it looks like more Republicans have been arrested for voter fraud nationally than Democrats.
That is ignorance doing the talking.
https://www.businessinsider.com/voter-election-fraud-pennsylvania-charge-dead-mom-vote-trump-2020-12
A dummy, that can link to empty articles, who lacks comprehension. If he truly understood what he was talking about he would be able to use his own words.
Pitiful demonstration by a stupid person
Poor Allan objects to evidence if it isn’t digested for him.
What a fool anonymous is calling yet another Allan. All he did was comment that anonymous doesn’t have enough brains in his head to figure out what the article was saying. This anonymous is a dumb-as$.
Allan has a lot of verbal tics. He often gives himself away.
If you don’t know Allan well enough to recognize him, dumb-as$, that doesn’t make him unrecognizable to some of us.
You have a lot of problems and they are demonstrated on the blog. I like that guy Allan. He must have been really good to make you get so crazy.
I must be really good to make you get so crazy.
“I must be really good to make you get so crazy.”
The sheep replied in the affirmative but thought you were rather dumb.
REGARDING ABOVE:
Anonymous misrepresents the Politico article. Here is a key paragraph from said article:
“The evidence to challenge the 4,000 registrations in Muscogee County was particularly sparse. The challenge was lodged Dec. 14 by a local voter named Ralph Russell who alleged that he had compared evidence from publicly accessible voter registration databases to prove that these voters had moved out of Georgia.”
Edited from: “Judge Blocks Voter Purge In 2 Georgia Counties”
Politico, 12/28/20
………………………………………………..
The article notes that the individual raising these challenges is just a private citizen with no official standing. His challenge would have disenfranchised 4000 voters, just before the Jan 5 run-off, based on “sparse evidence”.
You buried the lede. The presiding judge is the *sister* of Stacey Abrams — the Georgia democrat in charge of recruiting voters for the two democratic senate candidates. (In her own mind, she’s also the governor of Georgia.)
Stacey Abrams’ *sister* ruled in favor of Stacey Abrams (and the democrats).
One word: Recusal.
And, yet, some still wonder why so many Americans don’t trust the election process.
Clarence Thomas’s wife is a well known right wing organizer. Should he recuse himself from any cases involving subjects she has worked on?
And, yet, some still wonder why so many Americans don’t trust the election process.
Recusal in this matter is as obvious as it gets. I’d add in a loss of trust in the justice system as well. Of course you’ll have the same asshats defending this because reasons.
“ One word: Recusal.
And, yet, some still wonder why so many Americans don’t trust the election process.”
Democrats do not believe in recusing themselves, even if caught red handed taking a bribe.
They will never admit they cheated, either, even though they DID get caught red handed.
If I gave you the names of some judges appointed by Democrats who had recused themselves, would you admit that you’re wrong?
I’d have thought it inappropriate in previous era to extend a pardon to some of the people on Trump’s list. The trouble is the impunity of the courts has generated a prosecutocracy which manufactures process-is-punishment charges against anyone in the prosecutor’s gunsights. I wouldn’t assume anyone was guilty unless I knew something about the case. See the wreckage a federal judge in cahoots with a prosecutor made of Conrad Black’s businesses. A lot of these people are plain evil.
judicial tyrants. and in case some judicial tyrants are listening, trust me, lawyers will care less and less about your fake lame gag rule on lawyers criticizing you, RPC 8.2. good luck enforcing that one if you keep up this kind of garbage
Saloth Sar
Fascinating. Turley must be shaking his head at the state of his once renowned legal blog. On a post where the issue couldn’t be more blatantly illegal or unethical, the usual suspects cannot snap out of their blinding Trump/Republican rage long enough to just admit this judge violated the code of judicial ethics. I’ve said it before, if Turley doesn’t plant a legal flag on his blog by directly responding to commenters, he might as well pack it up and move over to Facebook.
Olly, the judge was clearly out of line.
Yet if one were to engage in What Abouts, they could simply point out that Trump has said and tweeted inappropriate statements several times per day every day of his presidency.
Leave it to you Paint Chips, to assert a false equivalency as a What About.
Olly, today Trump is calling on Georgia’s (Republican) Governor to resign. This because said governor refuses to give credence to false elections claims.
That’s his prerogative. Let me know if he sends federal marhals in to escort him from the premises.
The conduct we are seeing in our public officials is atrocious. That demonstrates a lack of public understanding. The nation should be outraged at how the election process was managed. Our next President will likely be one of the least qualified persons who as a public official has acted against American interest to bolster his families wealth.
You mean our current President. FIFY.
Anonymous,
Your remarks are contradictory, unless you have an imposter making remarks about your remarks.
Many people comment anonymously. There’s no contradiction, only people with different views.
True, but with the level of intelligence demonstrated by some non-stop anonymous posters and others one cannot expect decent comments.
You must be talking about the not so nice anonymous. Nasty and dumb. Now he will call me Allan, but this discussion would have died had he not been so insulting. HE recently called John Say, Allan as well. This gut needs someone to check out his brains.
A few observations. The canons refer to “political activity” but JT refers to “political commentary” as well. He doesn’t seem to be worried about how limiting such commentary limits the free speech and discussion that he promotes in other contexts. Also, does limiting such commentary regarding presidential pardons actually hurt the cause of judicial independence because judges are not able to criticize pardons that overturns part of their work.
Judges must by definition not be anything other than impartial. By definition, they must avoid even the appearance impropriety. They are judges. If they break this code, they can not only create great harm to their reputations, but to the Judiciary. They system works because of the the air of impartiality. There is a reason the statue of justice is blindfolded. It signifies that all are equal under the law and justice sees no favorites.
If you think a judge is biased, how do you trust them to rule based on the law and facts as compared to how they personally feel about a defendant?
As for his rights, judges understand what they are signing up for when they take on the robes.
For better or not, Trump seems to bring out the worst in people. It makes him look small, petty, and biased. This judge should have know better.
Turley: “What Pratt said publicly was wrong. It undermines not just his credibility but that of his court and his other colleagues.”
***
Exactly. Conduct like this has significantly eroded the reputation of the courts and it does not appear likely to stop soon.
I wonder if this judge has always been this vicious or if he is following Biden into the twilight. Perhaps both.
Thank you for covering this. It needed to be done and it needs to be done by others as well.
Bill Barr assessed the situation correctly last year so Turley’s continual hand-wringing is pointless. It isnt even good porn. Nothing is going to change the Left’s trajectory. Nothing except war.
See C-Span clip below
Nov 15, 2019
“Attorney General William Barr Criticizes the Political Left
While delivering remarks at the Federalist Society’s National Lawyer’s Convention, Attorney General William Barr criticizes what he calls the Left’s congressional oversight of the Executive Branch.”
……
Immediately after President Trump won election, opponents inaugurated what they called “The Resistance,” and they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver available to sabotage the functioning of his Administration. Now, “resistance” is the language used to describe insurgency against rule imposed by an occupying military power. It obviously connotes that the government is not legitimate. This is a very dangerous – indeed incendiary – notion to import into the politics of a democratic republic. What it means is that, instead of viewing themselves as the “loyal opposition,” as opposing parties have done in the past, they essentially see themselves as engaged in a war to cripple, by any means necessary, a duly elected government.
A prime example of this is the Senate’s unprecedented abuse of the advice-and-consent process. The Senate is free to exercise that power to reject unqualified nominees, but that power was never intended to allow the Senate to systematically oppose and draw out the approval process for every appointee so as to prevent the President from building a functional government.
Yet that is precisely what the Senate minority has done from his very first days in office. As of September of this year, the Senate had been forced to invoke cloture on 236 Trump nominees — each of those representing its own massive consumption of legislative time meant only to delay an inevitable confirmation. How many times was cloture invoked on nominees during President Obama’s first term? 17 times. The Second President Bush’s first term? Four times. It is reasonable to wonder whether a future President will actually be able to form a functioning administration if his or her party does not hold the Senate.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4830506/attorney-general-william-barr-criticizes-political-left
I’m sure you’ll also complain about McConnell refusing to allow Obama judicial nominees to come up for a vote, leaving lots of vacancies for Trump to fill. He bragged about it to Sean Hannity.
Biden and all of his minions should be shot
Next question?
There will be no “war” with leaders like Barr who make sure that the Deep State is on track and protected
I like many of his speeches but his deeds are what we look to in order to understand the truth of his own political connections
The “Left” is not the enemy. The “Left’ is a paid phenomenon generated by billionaires who fake people out with their countless hired hands.
THEY are the enemy. The billionaires. Actually if “the Left” understood much about “Leftist” insights of value over the past 200 years, they would understand, the billionaires are the enemy too. But, they are a fake “left” just as much as the old RINO Republican party is itself a fake opposition to the establishment party of the Democrats. And the true “Right” if there is any such thing in America, is almost completely unknown beyond intellectual circles. THE BILLIONAIRES KEEP IT THIS WAY
The only “war” worth having now, is not with the “Left” it is with BILLIONAIRES
Sal Sar
Pratt is the type of slime one gets when a pervert is given the power to appoint judges.
So you think the pervert Trump appointed a lot of slime?
What are the remedies for violations of the judicial ethics?
File a complaint –
https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/judicial-conduct-disability/faqs-filing-judicial-conduct-or-disability-complaint
If this jurist was a Republican making comments about Obama’s pardons, the House would initiate impeachment proceedings.
Hypocrisy and mendacity rule these days
“Hypocrisy and mendacity rule these days”
You voted for him right? He’ll be gone soon.
What will Democrats do when Mitch McConnell and the GOP controlled Senate block Biden’s every move?
Wear your pink pussy hat again or burn down the country again?
Maybe you should wait for the results of the 1/5 runoff election in GA before assuming that you’ll end up with Mitch McConnell and a GOP controlled Senate.
This is one of the most irrelevant blogs in the universe.
WGAF! Thousands of Americans are dying a day from a virus, the President is trying to scrape up a coup, the US was the victim of a cyber attack on our most important and sensitive agencies, and a bomb was exploded in Nashville, all ignored by our “President”, and Turley finds more water behind the barn he has to carry for his master, otherwise know as the most powerful man in the world and – according to Turley – it’s biggest victim.
Poor him!
Irrelevant? You can’t even stay on topic.
Diogenes, the topis is always the same: CNN, MSNBC, and the Democrats are bad and the world is so unfair to Trump. This is coming from a Fox News regular who somehow never finds fault with that network despite his obsession with it’s mirror twins. You’d think it was the BBC.
It’s not always the same. Trump’s conduct has been criticized on this blog and comment board repeatedly.
Now to the question at hand. Do you or don’t you approve of Pratt’s conduct?
Please, answer the relevant question. You can digress as much as you like after that.
Millions of Americans see the guillotine for the Democrats as the best option. That or sending them to China…. we will even throw in a few masks
Diogenes, that would require me to spend time on the thoughts of a retired judge and I don’t GAFF.
Im tired of the whole Trump round and round too. Trump is on his way out.
I would agree, let’s get on with talking about more-relevant topics
and yet I see on thread after thread, not just turley, but joe friday bringing up trump, trump trump, just as much as turley does
Trump goes out of office soon. Let’s focus on the coming events and not be stuck lookin in the rear view mirror
just a thought
Saloth Sar
“This is one of the most irrelevant blogs in the universe. ”
Then at long last, go.
We are at least as tired of you as you appear to be of Turley.
You really are tiresome.
if it is irrelevant than why does joe friday choose to comment daily here which by implication means he chooses to be irrelevant too
we see how much sense this remark makes: none
Sal Sar
I’m sure that JT is concerned about the credible accusations of perjury made against Kavanaugh and wants them to be investigated. JT’s concerns about judicial ethics wouldn’t be biased, right?
JT claims to have “immediately criticized those pardons as manifestly unjustified and inimical to our legal system,” but he’s chosen not to write a column about them.
Stop changing the subject. The discussion is about Pratt. Kavanaugh has been discussed before.
You trolls are never intellectually honest. You just hate on Professor Turley because he’s a liberal and not hate-filled radical.
If you think Turley is a liberal, you probably have a closet full of Trump ties and Trump water. He’s a liberal like I’m the King of Siam.
JT isn’t a liberal. Not sure why you think he’s a liberal.
Where did JT seriously discuss the many ethics complaints filed against Kavanaugh claiming that he committed perjury? I’d like to read it, but can’t find it.
Do you have anything to say about JT’s claim to have “immediately criticized those pardons as manifestly unjustified and inimical to our legal system”? That’s a quote from the column, so it’s not changing the topic, right?
NO, anonymous, the musings of a retried judge of course take precedent over the unethical and self obsessed antics of the most powerful man in the world (did I mention, who is also a world class a..hole?).
What is wrong with you?
Trump’s great skill his conning easy marks like monument, no doubt a Trump U grad.
Stop changing the subject. The discussion is about Pratt. Trump has been discussed before.
You trolls are never intellectually honest. You just hate on Professor Turley because he’s a liberal and not hate-filled radical.
Turley, points out a slight irony in his criticism of the judge’s comment. He mentions that many “ethicists and experts stretched ethical rules to the breaking point.” It’s a strange criticism given That the president himself which Turley admits freely has always stretched and stretched ethical rules, even blatantly breaking them at times with impunity, and has not been as harsh as he is with others who are not Trump or his most loyal supporters.
Even justice Scalia has been known to “stretch ethical rules” from time to time by going on hunting trips with people who have cases before him.
Stretching ethical rules is not really breaking them. Turley points out a judge that chose to give a harsher punishment despite recommendations of probation, BUT it’s a….recommendation only. It doesn’t mean it’s guaranteed that it will be the punishment. It’s still solely the discretion of the judge to grant such a recommendation or not. Turley being a lawyer should know that judges have wide discretion on sentences unless they are limited by law.
“ Even justice Scalia has been known to “stretch ethical rules” from time to time by going on hunting trips with people who have cases before him.”
He has been dead for a while.
Try again. We are a patient group. We might even guide you in articulating cogent arguments, constructing meaningful sentences rich in thought and…..
bwahahahahahahaha
Beijing Biden, Scalia being dead is irrelevant. The subject of the issue being discussed by Turley is ethical behavior of judges.
Scalia was a judge who also “stretched the limits of ethical behavior”.
SCOTUS is the top of the top. They decide on their own if they feel like honoring any socalled canons.
The judicial canons are handwritten by the state supreme court judges not by the legislatures. ditto that federal. hence the SCOTUS justices honor them or not as they please. that is the reality of “judicial ethics and canons” from the practicioner’s perspective, Svelz
Saloth Sar
“ SCOTUS is the top of the top. They decide on their own if they feel like honoring any socalled canons.”
That doesn’t make them above the rules. If that were the case the credibility of the Supreme Court would be worthless.
Stop changing the subject. The discussion is about Pratt. Trump has been discussed before.
You trolls are never intellectually honest. You just hate on Professor Turley because he’s a liberal and not hate-filled radical.
Diogenes, the subject is ethics of judges. Scalia was also a judge who “stretched ethical rules”.
Scratch a Prgressive and you may find a Roland Freisler or Vasiliy Vasilievich Ulrikh waiting to rule..
One of the most visible symptoms of TDS is a public display of stupidity.
Once his emotion subsides, Judge Pratt will be embarrassed.
More importantly, imagine appearing before a judge so given to fits of anger that he forgets his judicial obligations.
Trump has a great skill; he induces people to display their intemperance publicly for the whole world to see. People like Judge Pratt who obviously knew how to play the game (otherwise he would never have gotten a judgeship) open the kimono and show their shortcomings.
Now the whole judicial system knows that Judge Pratt is a partisan hack given to fits of intemperance.
“Once his emotions subsides….will be embarrassed.”
Your comment could only come from a Republican. You illustrate why Republicans lose elections. Democrats know no ethics, no sense of restraint, no sense of shame, never mind embarrassment. Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, etc
”Immediately after President Trump won election, opponents inaugurated what they call ‘The Resistance’ and they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver to sabotage the functioning of the executive branch.”
– Bill Barr
There is only one suitable response. Fight back, hit harder, more determinedly, unapologetically with no restraint. Fire meet Nukes. Only then will Republicans win.
The only other option is war which looks better with each passing day
BG gets it.
But, I submit that the enemy is not the fake Democrat party, nor is our ally the fake Republican party.
The enemy is the group of American billionaires who want to control everything, lock us down, lock us up, put us in the sick house, the poor house, and the mad house. And then complete their globalist plan to erase the nation state as such, including destroying American sovereignty. So they can be even more powerful and untouchable than they are now.
BILLIONAIRES ARE THE ENEMY
Wake me up for “War” when the ENEMY has been properly named.
Saloth Sar
Monument, being incompetent is not a skill.
Judges are human. Like everyone, they are not perfect. Even if they are expected to have higher standards they still make mistakes. That’s not stupidity. What about free speech? Judges are not prohibited from stating an opinion outside of court, even personal ones.
Look at justice Kavanaugh’s blubbering responses during his confirmation hearing, 😭 “ I like beer”. Does that statement prevent him from presiding over cases involving beer companies? No.
Turley is just whining for the sake of whining.
Do you take brie cheese and crackers with that whining?
Emoticons? A face with tears? Do your parents know you are trolling on a legal blog or did they leave you for a pack of wolves and the wolves thought better than raising a little girl?
Olivia, using emoticons is an effective method for conveying a point. It’s perfectly fine.
Your braying in personal insults on the other hand is not exactly legal blog material is it? Don’t be that ❄️.