Uber-Discovery and Judicial Ethics

From the Brennan Center, more about (now retired) racist, misogynist and generally all-around prejudiced Montana judge Richard Cebull, who seems to have an ugly life after:

JUDICIAL ETHICS

Groups File Petition to Preserve Retired Montana Judge’s Inappropriate Emails

Two Native American advocacy groups from Montana and South Dakota have filed a petition in a U.S. District Court in California requesting that an investigative file containing inappropriate emails sent by a federal judge be preserved as evidence, reports the Associated Press. Chief District Judge Richard Cebull “was investigated after forwarding a racist message involving [President] Obama. A judicial review panel found he sent hundreds of emails from his federal account that showed disdain for blacks, Indians, Hispanics, women, certain religions and others. He was publicly reprimanded and retired last year.” According to the Associated Press, “[t]he groups want to know if Chief District Judge Richard Cebull made biased decisions from the bench.” The plaintiffs’ attorney, Lawrence Organ, said “[t]heir next step will be to file a lawsuit seeking public release of the documents.” The judicial review panel “found no evidence of bias in [Judge Cebull’s] rulings” and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has said its file on Cebull is confidential. Yet Organ insists opening the record is the only way to know for sure whether Cebull made biased decisions, opining that “[t]he fundamental principles of our entire legal system fall apart if a judge doesn’t come in with a neutral position.”

This entry was posted in E. Preliminary investigation, H. Legal documents, J. Judge and courtroom, K. Discovery, Law, suits and order and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.