by Dennis Crouch
I recently spoke by phone with Judge Pauline Newman. At 98 years old, she seemed sharp, engaged, and fully conversant -- particularly regarding the legal questions swirling around her case (and its impact on the patent system). She turns 99 in June.
Judge Newman has been barred from exercising any function of her judicial office since late 2023, when she issued her last opinion. She remains, in name, an active-service judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. But, in every practical respect, she has been removed from the bench by her colleagues, without impeachment, without an actual finding of disability, and without any court ever reaching the merits of her constitutional claims. This week, her attorneys filed a petition for certiorari asking the Supreme Court to consider her case.
Newman v. Moore, No. 25-___ (U.S. Mar. 12, 2026), presents two questions about the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 (28 U.S.C. § 357(c)) that bars judicial review of judicial council "orders and determinations."
- Whether that bar extends to ultra vires acts that exceed the council's statutory and constitutional authority.
- Whether the bar forecloses claims seeking prospective injunctive relief against future unlawful orders.
Both questions arise against a factual backdrop that the D.C. Circuit itself described as raising "important and serious questions" about due process and judicial independence, while holding that its hands were tied by 25-year-old circuit precedent.