Breaking: A Misconduct Investigation Into Now-Retired Judge Kozinski, Accused Of Sexual Harassment, Won't Go Forward https://www.buzzfeed.com/zoetillman/a-misconduct-investigation-into-a-now-retired-judge-accused?utm_term=.efbGKNqDr … from @zoetillman
-
-
Further note that
@kellyasingleton got me thinking about how the retirement/pension language — https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/371 … — arguably conflicts with the judicial council's reading of the complaint statute —>https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner/status/960679435035869185 …Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The court's reasoning - that his resignation made the investigation "unnecessary" - is unconvincing, given he'll likely receive a generous pension under 28 U.S.C. § 371. I think the big question is why the investigation doesn't appear to be relevant to § 371 eligibility.
-
But it will be 371(b)(2), so I’m not sure they have any discretion that. Although, that raises for me a significant question: It appears that statute still refers to even a (b)(2) retired judge as a “judge,” which undermines the judicial council’s logic further.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.