The judges and practitioners of the Federal Circuit have long labored under the image of the nerds of the federal courts, handling cases involving patents, trademarks, and other specialized areas. Chief Judge Kimberly A. Moore may have hoped to address that deficit in social standing by paying a PR firm to come up with a video and theme song based on the Schoolhouse Rock genre. If so, a new video is unlikely to help matters.
While some lawyers who received the note from the PR film thought it might be a fake, it was apparently a court product. Here is what was circulated:
Please see here for the fun Schoolhouse Rock-style cartoon theme song for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that Chief Judge Kimberly A. Moore played at their Judiciary Conference on Fri. in Washington. The crowd seemed to enjoy, and it does a good job of explaining the court.
That suspicion may have only increased after clicking on the link:
I was unable to confirm the use or amount of public funds, but the involvement of a public relations firm suggests that money was budgeted for this effort.
Chief Moore may face questions over whether such expenditures are justified. Courts often spend money on conferences that bring in speakers and panels to discuss legal developments and theories. They also have funds for community related activities such as courthouse displays and tours.
The total appropriations for the Federal Circuit in 2025 was $40,365,723. The court increased that request by roughly $2 million. in 2026 to $42,321,260.
Looking at the itemized obligations section of the budget, most of the budget is for salaries. There are provisions for “communications” and “other services” but I could not find anything that clearly encompassed this type of promotional product.
Nevertheless, my assumption is that this expenditure would fall within the broad parameters given to the courts. For example, it could be subsumed within the budget of the annual judicial conference as a fun diversion for the judges and the lawyers. Moreover, if AI produced, the cost is likely relatively small.
While it does not reach Noem-like levels (and is focused on the court rather than the Chief Judge), some in Congress may not be thrilled by the notion of courts spending public funds to manage their public image.
If public funds were used for this video, some in Congress may soon be quoting from the original song over the costs: “Yes, I’m only a bill. And I’m sitting here on Capitol Hill.”
Kudos: Professor Josh Blackman
Perfect for Law Day presentation at schools. Best explanation to non-lawyers of the Federal Circuit that I have ever seen. In view of the huge amount of money most agencies spend on public relations, I am not particularly upset. It’s been since day of Reagan’s second inauguration that I orally argued before the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., but my recollection is the Court had much nicer digs than represented in the cartoon.
I’m going to say it’s AI also based on some songs a friend did for me as a present for Christmas. Not an expert on this topic, though.
Pure cringe.
The target audience are incoming representatives to the House and refreshers for others. 😏.
“Chief Judge Kimberly A. Moore may have hoped to address that deficit in social standing by paying a PR firm to come up with a video and theme song based on the Schoolhouse Rock genre.”
Did Kim pay the PR firm from personal funds?
___________________________________________________
Using tax dollars or organizational funds for personal goals instead of institutional goals is strictly illegal and unethical.
Regardless of whether funds are labeled “discretionary,” they belong to the institution and must only be used for authorized public or organizational purposes.
Why This Is Prohibited
Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Officials and employees are legally obligated to act in the best interest of the organization, not themselves.
Misappropriation of Funds: Using entity money for personal gain constitutes theft, fraud, or embezzlement.
Taxpayer Protections: Government discretionary funds are strictly regulated by appropriations laws to ensure public money serves the public good.
Legal and Professional Consequences
Criminal Charges: Individuals can face prosecution, fines, and prison time for fraud or theft.
Termination: Employees face immediate firing and permanent damage to their professional reputation.Financial Restitution: Courts typically order the individual to pay back every dollar misused.
Perhaps one of the silliest things I have ever seen. I see no necessity for this whatsoever. Sheesh.
This video appears to be entirely generative AI, and looks like garbage.
Dreadful schlock. Disturbing, too. Not only does it unilaterally omit three judges on the Federal Circuit, including the impeached-by-bullying Judge Newman, but the Chief Judge is desperately trying to channel Taylor Swift, whose antics must be unanimously applauded by the subset of judges who are allowed to appear on the bench. Dissenters must be banished! And don’t smear Schoolhouse Rock by comparing this to that. This video shows Uncle Sam tipping the scales of justice with government lucre. Nice! Is the Federal Circuit fessing up here?
This was made with Ilhan Omar and Mazie Hirono in mind.
Fredericka Wilson and de lauro?? AL Green and Hakeem? I’ll bet even Benny Thompson and Senator Clyburn hahaha…
Carpe diem, if I had a sign in name it’d be Carpe diem
It seems to be an “infotaiment” video quite appropriate for today’s laptop-toting students.
Congress may not be thrilled by the notion of courts spending public funds to manage their public image.
I’m not sure “public image” is a fair characterization. It seemed more like a catchy way to explain the scope of the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. Because it is a “nerdy” court (as you say), it’s likely most lawyers couldn’t give you a good description of its subjects, other than maybe, “Patents?” In that sense, it is arguably educational, and so the small amount of funds spent on it is justified. Congress members complaining about that would also come off as puritanical, given the light-hearted tone of the video, and they are political animals hyper-sensitive to their image.
Moreover, if AI produced, the cost is likely relatively small
That’s true, but my gut tells me this is not AI. I’ve seen many AI produced videos on YouTube and they have a different look and feel.
Here is a novel idea. We could teach English language reading comprehension in public school. allowing students and graduates to read the original farking document (i.e., the Constitution) and inform themselves about the responsibilities and limited authorities of federal government institutions that way. Sheesh!
NTM that we do already pay beau coup taxes to those public schools, and it is their responsibility to teach civics to their charges – that shouldn’t require a separate effort and expense from the court system itself.
I thought it was informative in a catchy way.
It did raise a question for me. Why isn’t this Court the one to receive any and all cases against the federal government. As noted in the video, it exists to provide uniformity across the nation where those particular federal subjects are concerned. Why not all the others? Why have one district or circuit of appeals rule an EPA or HHS rule/policy/law means X and another Y?
Ok, I may be in the minority, but i loved it. I’m giving it a 👍 …
Maybe it’s a generational thing. How do the Article lll people best spread understanding of what they bring to the co-equal branches of the national government? I was underwhelmed by the video. Maybe generational again. It came across as an attempt to cover the black robe with tie dyed. And downplay the nondemocratic design of the judicial power to pronounce enforceable finality to the disputes in their jurisdiction. But again that’s viewpoint. Particularly for youth I’m all in for innovation that undumbs understanding.
I respectfully disagree. Having argued several cases there I know it is an obscure, but important, part of the federal judiciary. The cost of this was probably less than new conference room furniture for the judges and it will help clarify its role to the public and the bar.
Counsellor, I’ll take you at your word. Your hands on experience at that court appeals to my all in thought, and it’s helpful.
And congress…
Carpe diem
How many cases = “several”?
😸
The propaganda video is typical fare for a low IQ Woke Karen Black Robe Faux Illuminati like this woman. Gotta really wonder what is going on behind the blank stare eyes of this idiot woman – probably daydreaming about her next vacation during most of her courtroom time.
Perhaps an end-of-year “use it or lose it” budget expenditure. One of government’s/courts’ odious secrets.
The very idea that the US Federal judicial system would perceive both need and entitlement to produce something of this nature fully attests to the decline and imminent demise of our Republic. End of story.
We really don’t need this. If there is an elementary school out there somewhere that is doing a civics course this might be a slight break from the boredom for the kids to watch when they discuss the judiciary.
I give this a 2-3 on Rotten Tomatoes.
It’s time to replace Uncle Sam with Auntie Pam or maybe Cousin IT.
It’s a time of lowest expectations. Lower your expectations. This video was made for congress. They might need to know and don’t.
” This video was made for congress. They might need to know and don’t.”
I’ll buy that as a justification on one condition. That is that a test be administered after each Congressperson views the video, and if they fail, they resign or are expelled. That might prove highly beneficial.
How much did this cost the American taxpayer?
How about the courts making decisions on a constitutional basis instead of politics to improve the courts image?
Until that happens no amount of PR will help the courts image.
Some people in our world have too much time on their hands., and the “look at me” syndrome continues to thrive.