Federal Judge Receives Slap On the Wrist After Engaging In Sexual Relations In Chambers in Earshot of Staff and Lying to the Court About It
Wednesday, May 27, 2026
For Immediate Release
Contact: Aliza Shatzman, 267-481-2095, aliza.shatzman@legalaccountabilityproject.org
Federal Judge Receives Slap On the Wrist After Engaging In Sexual Relations In Chambers in Earshot of Staff and Lying to the Court About It
Life-tenured federal judges who interpret our laws should be held to the highest ethical standards. Yet right now, they’re held to none.
On May 22, 2026, the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability issued a Memorandum of Decision affirming the findings and discipline of the Eleventh Circuit Judicial Council. The Judicial Council, on February 11, 2026, issued a detailed order and December 2025 report finding that an unnamed U.S. District Court judge within the Eleventh Circuit (covering Georgia, Alabama, and Florida), engaged in judicial misconduct by: (1) engaging in an extramarital affair with a high-ranking law enforcement officer and having sexual intercourse in the judge’s chambers during business hours within hearing distance of staff; (2) attending a partisan political event; and (3) making false statements to the Chief Circuit Judge and Chief District Judge that were material to the investigation of the allegations.
The Eleventh Circuit Judicial Council issued a private reprimand, along with the following discipline: the subject judge agreed to issue apology letters to six former clerks and agreed not to serve as Chief Judge when eligible or to ever serve on a Judicial Council. The Circuit Judicial Council opted against more serious discipline because of the judge’s allegedly exemplary judicial service and because they believed the judge was unlikely to engage in further misconduct.
The Legal Accountability Project (LAP), the first and only nonprofit organization leading the charge against sexual harassment and misconduct in the courts, is disappointed but not surprised to learn the federal judiciary found such egregious judicial misconduct warranted such toothless discipline, given the judiciary’s general unwillingness to hold judges accountable for misconduct.
According to LAP’s President and Founder, Aliza Shatzman, “What would be a fireable offense in most other workplaces is given no more than a slap on the wrist in the federal judiciary, where judges are, inexplicably, exempt from the anti-harassment laws they interpret. It defies logic that the judiciary shields judges who commit gross misconduct–engaging in sexual relations in the workplace in earshot of staff and lying to the Court about it–from real accountability, including by shielding their identities in anonymous disciplinary orders like the one recently published by the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability.”
Shatzman added, “punishment is a deterrent: when federal judges are never held accountable for misconduct, it’s unsurprising that this type of misconduct persists, unabated, in the federal courts. Frankly, the misconduct this judge committed–having sexual relations with a law enforcement officer in chambers, in earshot of clerks; and lying to the Chief Circuit Judge and Chief District Judge–strikes at the heart of judicial integrity and destroys public confidence in an impartial, ethical court system.”
This type of conduct is unbecoming of a life-tenured federal judge: the judge should step down, or the Judicial Conference should consider elevating this matter to Congress to consider impeachment proceedings. It is judicial misconduct like this, which the federal judiciary regularly sweeps under the rug and insists is rare, that fuels public distrust of and lack of confidence in the federal courts as fair and impartial arbiters of disputes. Judges should act as if they are above reproach in their conduct: LAP encourages judges and lawmakers to put partisanship aside to ensure judges who interpret our laws, abide by the spirit of those same laws.
Furthermore, LAP urges Congress to reintroduce and finally pass the Judiciary Accountability Act (JAA), which would extend Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other civil rights, anti-discrimination, and labor protections, to over 30,000 exempt federal judiciary employees, so judges no longer have legal immunity for mistreating staff, and law clerks can blow the whistle without fear of retaliation. Congress should also revise the judicial complaint process under the Judicial Conduct & Disability Act (JCDA), because the JCDA does not hold judges meaningfully accountable for misconduct; nor deter future misconduct; nor facilitate candid reporting. The current code of conduct for federal judges relies on subordinates such as judicial law clerks to blow the whistle on powerful judges, which they rarely do, given their vulnerability to retaliation.
Said Shatzman, “Judicial misconduct is not rare; it just rarely comes to light, since the judiciary's disciplinary process is wholly internal and lacks outside oversight by Congress or a neutral third party. ‘Self-policing’ like this leads to a lack of policing and lack of meaningful discipline for judges who engage in misconduct that would be illegal in other workplaces.”
Shatzman added, “It should go without saying that a judge who engages in a sexual relationship in chambers, in earshot of staff, and lies to the Court about it–the type of misconduct that federal judges preside over in their courtrooms–should not be a life-tenured federal judge. I can’t think of anything more prejudicial to the impartial administration of justice than seeing this type of misconduct go unpunished yet again.”