Federal judges who refused to hire Columbia grads are cleared of misconduct charges
The judges refused to hire Columbia graduates due to the anti-Israel chaos that took place at the school this year, and what they saw as the Columbia administration’s ineffective response to the disruptive protests.
‘As judges who hire law clerks every year to serve in the federal judiciary, we have lost confidence in Columbia as an institution of higher education. Columbia has instead become an incubator of bigotry,’ they wrote.
A judicial council recently declared that a group of federal judges who refuse to hire graduates from Columbia University as law clerks did not violate judicial ethical regulations.
The judges’ refusal was related to the disruptive anti-Israel protests that gripped Columbia this spring.
A complaint was filed against the judges, arguing that their opposition to hiring Columbia graduates could mean they would discriminate in the future against defendants on the basis of their political beliefs.
Fifth Circuit Court chief judge Priscilla Richman dismissed the complaint in June, claiming it “does not support a finding of misconduct,” and the Judicial Council for the Fifth Court upheld Judge Richman’s decision on Aug. 2.
[RELATED: Columbia is issuing press passes, but the pro-Hamas occupiers are in charge of journalists’ access: EXCLUSIVE VIDEO]
“Judges do not violate ethical rules or standards when they exercise discretion in refusing to hire law clerks who may have engaged in unlawful conduct or violation of a universtiy’s [sic] rules,” Richman wrote in her June dismissal of the original complaint against the judges.
Central to Richman’s dismissal of the original complaint was the idea that judges have discretion to hire from universities according to the judges’ own standards.
“Judges have many qualifications they use to determine whether a potential law clerk meets their standards for hiring. . . . such hiring qualifications do not mean the judge is necessarily biased against attorneys or litigants appearing before them who do not meet the specified metrics,” she wrote.
“The subject judges have chosen to boycott the hiring of future graduates of the university as a means to implement their hiring discretion,” Richman continued. “While reasonable jurists may disagree about the effectiveness of their method and whether it is justified, the judges have not engaged in misconduct.”
Though the eight judges accused in the complaint were unnamed, it is likely they belong to a group of 13 judges who announced their opposition to hiring Columbia graduates in a May 6 letter due to the anti-Israel chaos that recently took place at the Ivy League institution.
“As judges who hire law clerks every year to serve in the federal judiciary, we have lost confidence in Columbia as an institution of higher education,” the judges wrote. “Columbia has instead become an incubator of bigotry. As a result, Columbia has disqualified itself from educating the future leaders of our country.”
[RELATED: Columbia students file lawsuit against ‘Squad’ members who supported anti-Israel encampment]
The judges continued to argue that, if the Columbia administration was “serious” about restoring the school’s reputation, it would establish “[s]erious consequences for students and faculty who have participated in campus disruptions and violated established rules concerning the use of university facilities and public spaces.”
“Considering recent events, and absent extraordinary change,” the letter concluded, “we will not hire anyone who joins the Columbia University community—whether as undergraduates or law students— beginning with the entering class of 2024.”
Campus Reform has contacted Columbia University for comment. This article will be updated accordingly.
