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…
Banned From the Internet: A Term of Probation That Is Overly Restrictive
October 11, 2010
Banned From the Internet: A Term of Probation That Is Overly Restrictive
By: Ifrah Law
The following opinion article by Ifrah PLLC founding partner A. Jeff Ifrah and associate Steven Eichorn appeared in the National Law Journal on October 11, 2010. Banned from the Internet Prohibiting a defendant on probation from conducting any business online is overly restrictive and not reasonably related to legitimate sentencing goals. By A. Jeff Ifrah and Steven Eichorn The Internet is becoming the town square for…
Too Little, Too Late for Defense Argument?
September 28, 2010
Too Little, Too Late for Defense Argument?
By: Ifrah Law
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit is considering whether the government’s belated disclosure of potentially exculpatory evidence deprived criminal defendant Amit Mathur of a fair trial. The fact that Mathur’s counsel received some of the evidence after the government’s case in chief and declined to use it in Mathur’s defense makes it unlikely that Mathur will obtain the new trial he seeks….
Fourth Amendment the Loser in BALCO Ruling
September 27, 2010
Fourth Amendment the Loser in BALCO Ruling
By: Ifrah Law
A recent ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit is a win for Major League Baseball players whose drug-testing records must now be returned to them after they were improperly seized in a 2002 federal steroids probe. But it’s not a win for Fourth Amendment values. In a September 13, 2010, en banc ruling, the appeals court took a major step…
For Convicted CEO, Legal Fee Payment Depends on the Agreement
September 17, 2010
For Convicted CEO, Legal Fee Payment Depends on the Agreement
By: Ifrah Law
When is a company obliged to pay the legal fees of a wayward employee? The answer generally depends on the precise wording of the employee agreement, if an agreement exists. A good case in point is the recent one of Frances Flood, the CEO of ClearOne Communications, who left the company in 2004 while under SEC investigation. Things didn’t turn out well for her:…
Impeachment Trial of Federal Judge Raises Issue of ‘Kickbacks’
September 16, 2010
Impeachment Trial of Federal Judge Raises Issue of ‘Kickbacks’
By: Ifrah Law
The impeachment trial of U.S. District Judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr. is continuing before a U.S. Senate committee. Porteous, a federal judge in New Orleans, is accused of four counts of corruption. Each count is referred to as an article of impeachment. The first article of impeachment involves what some have described as a “kickback” scheme. Porteous, as a state court judge before he was…
