Canon 1: A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary
…. “A judge should maintain and enforce high standards of conduct and should personally observe those standards, so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved.”
Call me strict, but I don’t feel having adulterous sex while your clerks snicker outside the door is consistent with a “high standard of conduct.
Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all Activities
…A judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
…A judge should not allow family, social, political, financial, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment.
Again, maybe it’s just me, but using office hours to play hide the salami wouldn’t prompt me to have confidence in the judgment of a judge. Also, having sex in a judge’s chambers might be deemed sufficient to make a police commander thing he might be able to influence said judge.
Canon 3: A Judge Should Perform the Duties of the Office Fairly, Impartially and Diligently
…The duties of judicial office take precedence over all other activities.
…A judge should… maintain order and decorum in all judicial proceedings.
…A judge should be patient, dignified, respectful, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity.
…A judge should diligently discharge administrative responsibilities, maintain professional competence in judicial administration, and facilitate the performance of the administrative responsibilities of other judges and court personnel.
….A judge should practice civility, by being patient, dignified, respectful, and courteous, in dealings with court personnel, including chambers staff. A judge should not engage in any form of harassment of court personnel.
Having sex in a her chambers violated all of these. It wasn’t dignified, it places recreational sex over her judicial responsibilities, it did not maintain decorum, it was disrespectful to her staff and created a hostile work environment. Otherwise, she was great!
Canon 4: A Judge May Engage in Extrajudicial Activities that are Consistent with the Obligations of Judicial Office
… a judge should not participate in extrajudicial activities that detract from the dignity of the judge’s office.
The jokes write themselves.
But wait…there’s more! Judge Ross couldn’t even comply with the terms of her rap-on-the -wrist punishment. Here is the “letter of apology” she sent to her clerks, which rates a putrid 10 on the Apology Scale:
“Thank you for your contributions to our court during your clerkship. I convey my deepest apology for not taking steps to ensure that it was a more positive experience. I wish you all the best in your future legal endeavors and in life.”
Unbelievable. This was so clearly inadequate that Chief Circuit Judge William Pryor of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Atlanta sent Ross a letter informing her that the initial apology letter did not address her misconduct with sufficient specificity. Ross then sent a revised letter apologizing for exposing the clerks to her “inappropriate personal relationship.” “My initial letter was entirely deficient, as I did not take full accountability for my actions, and I failed to give you the apology that you deserve,” wrote Ross.
What everyone deserves is for this unethical judge to resign and save everyone the bother of impeaching her.
Ethics Alarms 
Is there a secret Fani Willis Society the general public is unaware of?
I almost included a Fani reference but decided to leave it to you…
Wait. Did she fire her staff?
jvb
For ratting her out? No. But I wouldn’t put it past her.
It sure is a good thing Democrats don’t shatter norms.
This adds a new meaning to the legal term “noisy withdrawal.”
The overall issue of dealing with incompetent judges is a massive train wreck. This is true at both the state level and the federal level. There is a compelling reason for the absolute autonomy judges have. We can’t exactly have people suing judges. Incompetence and misconduct should be addressed by the judiciary themselves, along with the impeachment route. But they’re not.
Why are they not? Because nether party will ever impeach a judge again. In this case, zero democrats would ever vote to remove this judge because it means creating an opening for Trump to appoint a new judge. But that’s just this specific example, the republicans will do the same if the party was reversed. Want a glaring counter example? Justice Thomas. He should be removed. But he won’t be. Even I don’t want him removed, because he’s the most solid originalist we have. I’d argue he’s the most solid Justice that represents: just follow the damn constitution.
I get the political side that’s making impeachment impossible. Judges have been politicized at a level that makes punishment impossible. I think the blame lies with two politicians in particular. I demonize FDR and Edward Kennedy more than any other.
FDR radically changed the federal government, moving it to a far more powerful and more socialist government than ever before. Rather than do the constitutional amendments that should have happened to radically change as he desired, he packed the supreme court to re-interpret the constitution in the way he desired. We start with United States v. Miller that redefined the 2nd amendment to say what it never said. That echos today with the 12 states hell bent on civilian disarmament and a feckless supreme court who won’t address rouge appellate courts who find nothing wrong with what they’re doing. We have Helvering v. Davis that redefined the power of congress, deciding it was no longer bound by article I section 8 of the constitution. Then it culminated in the pinnacle case of Wickard v. Filburn, finding no limit to federal power whatsoever.
Given all of the above about FDR, why does Sen Kennedy deserve an equal place in this? Robert Bork. Kennedy is the cause of the phrase “Borking”. Bork was one of the most qualified judges for the supreme court we’ve ever seen. The contrast between Bork and Anthony Kennedy was rather stark. I’d argue the only redeeming quality of Justice Kennedy was retiring in a manner that allowed him to be replaced with a arguably better Kavanaugh. The legacy of Sen Kennedy’s action was the end of the practice of letting presidents pick judges and the Senate only rejecting inferior candidates. The end game of this politics is both the inability of congress to address the bad judges combined with the tendency to pick candidate solely for their political ideology. Justice Jackson is the culmination of the latter part. Competency is no longer important when the overriding factor is political ideology, along with token qualities to check off DEI requirements for the left when it comes to democrat nominees.
What’s not stated is that she also probably ‘earns’ a six figure salary from the state, or whatever governmental body she is employed by.
She’s a federal judge so $249,900 per year. Plus full benefits until death, and full pay until death. Oh, and no social security taxes so that’s another $10K a year she doesn’t pay.