Judge James C. Ho’s departure from the Federal Judges Association signals concern over perceived political bias and safety prioritization in judicial narratives.
Quick Takes
- Judge James C. Ho, Trump appointee, resigned from the Federal Judges Association.
- Criticism focused on perceived bias in the association’s response to threats against judges.
- The FJA highlighted judicial safety and condemned reckless rhetoric.
- Judge Ho argues against selective support for judicial independence.
Ho Criticizes Perceived Bias
U.S. Circuit Judge James Ho, appointed by former President Donald Trump, has criticized the Federal Judges Association (FJA). During a Federalist Society event, he cited the association’s uneven response to threats against judges. Ho’s resignation aligns with his dissatisfaction over the lack of specific support for conservative judges, such as when Justice Brett Kavanaugh faced significant threats.
The FJA’s recent statement emphasized the importance of judicial safety and condemned “irresponsible rhetoric” that threatens judicial independence. Under President Judge Michelle Childs, the FJA pointed to increasing threats, violence, and disinformation impacting the judiciary. However, Ho expressed concern that the association selectively focused its advocacy efforts, undermining a balanced approach to judicial safety.
Federal Judges Association’s Stance
The FJA, in its statement, did not mention specific cases or judges but warned against endangering judicial independence through politicized discourse. The statement was issued during increasing attempts by figures such as Elon Musk and Trump allies to discredit judges who opposed current administration policies. Despite highlighting judicial safety as vital for democracy and law enforcement, critics argue the response lacked consistency, particularly concerning conservative targets.
Judge Ho pointed out that supporting judicial independence should not hinge on political preferences. His resignation raises questions about the FJA’s messaging regarding judicial safety and whether these contribute to impartial judicial conduct or political biases.
Reactions and Implications
The Federal Judges Association did not comment on Judge Ho’s departure. Their previous statements have focused on condemning threats without addressing specific incidents involving conservative judges. Judge Ho emphasized impartiality, stating, “You can’t say that you’re in favor of judicial independence only when it comes to decisions that you like. That’s not protecting the judiciary, that’s politicizing the judiciary.” This highlights broader concerns regarding the politicization of judicial safety measures within the current political landscape.
Judge Ho’s departure from the Federal Judges Association calls attention to the potential for bias and politicization within judicial narratives. This ongoing discussion demonstrates the need for balanced representation and advocacy to maintain the integrity of judicial independence amid growing concerns about safety and political pressures.
Sources
1. Trump-Appointed Judge Quits US Judicial Group Over Its Statement About Threats
2. Federal judge appointed by Trump quits group over statement on threats
