Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:
- an article discussing how the “Federal Circuit on Wednesday agreed to conduct en banc review over the firing of two immigration judges”;
- an article similarly outlining how the Federal Circuit “granted two former Justice Department employees’ request to expedite the appeal of their 2025 firings”;
- a blog post examining how, “in response to the May 12 opposition brief of . . . Chief Judge Kimberly Moore,” the Supreme Court denied Judge “Newman’s petition for certiorari”; and
- an article also discussing how the Supreme Court “declined . . . to hear a bid by the nation’s oldest federal judge, 98-year-old Pauline Newman, to overturn her suspension from duties.”
Ganesh Setty wrote an article for Law 360 discussing how the “Federal Circuit on Wednesday agreed to conduct en banc review over the firing of two immigration judges, after the Merit Systems Protection Board ruled that they constituted inferior officers who are subject to at-will removal by the president.” Setty explains how the Federal Circuit’s “vote to conduct en banc review comes after the petitioners . . . said in March that their case raises ‘once-in-a-generation’ constitutional questions on the extent of President Donald Trump’s power to fire executive branch officials under Article II of the U.S. Constitution.” For more information, check out the relevant case page in Jackler v. Department of Justice.
Erich Wagner published an article for Government Executive similarly outlining how the Federal Circuit “granted two former Justice Department employees’ request to expedite the appeal of their 2025 firings, which the Trump administration has argued were exempt from civil service rules.” Wagner highlights the importance of the case, noting that, “[s]ince Trump returned to office last year, hundreds of Justice Department workers have been subject to so-called ‘Article II firings,’ including immigration judges, employees previously assigned to cases investigating the president and prosecutors who worked on January 6 cases.” Again, for more information on this case, check out the relevant case page in Jackler v. Department of Justice.
Eileen McDermott published a blog post for IP Watchdog examining how, “in response to the May 12 opposition brief of . . . Chief Judge Kimberly Moore,” the Supreme Court denied Judge “Newman’s petition for certiorari.” McDermott highlights how Chief Judge Moore “argued that the Supreme Court should deny review because 28 U.S.C. 357(c) ‘bars from federal court statutory and as-applied constitutional challenges to judicial council or Judicial Conference orders issued under the Act.'” McDermott explains how Chief Judge Moore maintained “Congress ‘intended for those claims to be considered exclusively by the Judicial Conference.'”
Blake Brittain wrote an article for USA Today also discussing how the Supreme Court “declined . . . to hear a bid by the nation’s oldest federal judge, 98-year-old Pauline Newman, to overturn her suspension from duties.” Brittain emphasizes how a “panel of Federal Circuit judges cited staff reports of Newman’s ‘memory loss, confusion, paranoia and angry rants’ in documents released by the court in 2023. According to Brittain, Judge Newman’s filing argued “Chief Judge Moore . . . invoked the Disability Act improperly to perpetually sideline Judge Newman until she gives in to the bullying and retires or takes senior status.”