Insights < BACK TO ALL INSIGHTS
Judging the Judges
FEATURED
October 2, 2026
Judging the Judges
By: Lauren Scribner
Judges are in the business of holding people accountable for crimes and misconduct—but how do we hold judges accountable for their own ethical lapses? Recently, in a moment of frustration, Florida Second Circuit Judge J. Layne Smith told three attorneys practicing in his courtroom that he “would like to tell the deputy to pull his gun and shoot all three of [them] as far as [his] level of frustration right now.”[1] Yes—you read that correctly. A presiding judge vocalized his thought to have attorneys practicing in his courtroom shot by courtroom security. What should the consequence be for using such threatening language? A mere public reprimand and recusal from that case?[2] Or, should there be some sort of tangible punishment?…
Dismissive of Dismissal
September 25, 2026
Dismissive of Dismissal
By: James Trusty
During the two Trump administrations, a trend has begun to emerge of federal judges challenging the once-unrestricted authority of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to dismiss indictments. The longstanding framework of separation of powers suggests this judicial pushback is unsupported activism, but the judges claim the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (“Rules”) do not relegate their role to rubber stamping. Ultimately, this trajectory may lead…
In the age of AI, litigators must read between the lines—literally.
August 18, 2026
In the age of AI, litigators must read between the lines—literally.
By: Robert Ward
In the age of AI, litigators must read between the lines—literally. Any attorney who has litigated a case against a party proceeding pro se is familiar with the common refrain that courts liberally construe pro se filings.[1] This leniency was not enough for one Connecticut litigant. In a scheme that gives new meaning to the phrase “reading between the lines,” pro se plaintiff Matthew Elliot…
Will the Internet Taint a Loughner Verdict?
February 22, 2011
Will the Internet Taint a Loughner Verdict?
By: Ifrah Law
As Arizona plans a trial for accused Tucson shooter Jared Lee Loughner, a new set of questions has arisen: How will a jury be able to sit in impartial judgment, untainted by nonstop online coverage of the crime and its aftermath? What safeguards should a judge impose to keep the jury from following the case on the Internet and reaching a verdict based on facts…
Facebook Friends and Judicial Ethics
February 15, 2011
Facebook Friends and Judicial Ethics
By: Ifrah Law
Last December, another legal ethics commission addressed the question of whether a judge may become a “friend” on a social networking site with attorneys who appear as counsel in the judge’s courtroom. The Ohio Supreme Court Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline opined that a judge may “friend” attorneys as long as the judge takes care to protect the integrity and impartiality of the…
Is D.C. on the Way to Legalizing Online Poker?
February 2, 2011
Is D.C. on the Way to Legalizing Online Poker?
By: Ifrah Law
An amendment introduced to the District of Columbia Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Support Act and approved with little fanfare or advance warning could signal a major change in the law of i-gaming. The amendment, introduced by at-large Democrat Councilmember Michael A. Brown, would allow the D.C. Lottery to administer online poker by defining the D.C. Lottery to include both “games of skill and games of…
Amicus Briefs Urge Reduction in Rubashkin Fraud Sentence
January 25, 2011
Amicus Briefs Urge Reduction in Rubashkin Fraud Sentence
By: Ifrah Law
We first posted about Sholom Rubashkin—the former plant manager at the now-defunct Agriprocessors, Inc. — back in May 2010, when Rubashkin was awaiting sentence for more than 80 counts of fraud in connection with his operation of the kosher slaughterhouse. Since then, Chief U.S. District Judge Linda Reade of the Northern District of Iowa sentenced Rubashkin to 27 years in prison, an action that sparked…
California Court OKs Warrantless Search of Cell Phone
January 19, 2011
California Court OKs Warrantless Search of Cell Phone
By: Ifrah Law
The text messages in a defendant’s cell phone are in no way different, for the purposes of a police search after an arrest, from the defendant’s clothing or a cigarette package. That was the holding of the California Supreme Court on January 3, 2011, in People v. Diaz, a case in which the state’s highest court approved the police’s warrantless search of the text message…
