Judge
Eleanor
Ross
is
getting
a
lot
of
justified
scorn
right
now,
but
folks
are
really
not
directing
enough
disdain
toward
her
judicial
colleagues.
While
carrying
out
an
affair
with
a
high-ranking
law
enforcement
official
in
chambers
and
then
lying
about
it
will
probably
end
up
getting
the
Peach
State
judge
impeached,
there’s
not
enough
of
an
uproar
over
the
judges
from
the
Eleventh
Circuit
and
Judicial
Conference
Committee
on
Judicial
Conduct
and
Disability
who
saw
the
facts
of
this
matter
and
decided
the
right
response
was
to
bar
Ross
from
having
to
deal
with
the
administrative
burden
of
serving
as
a
chief
judge
and
to
write
apology
letters
to
her
clerks.
These
judges
even
went
so
far
as
to
structure
the
punishment
as
a
private
reprimand,
hoping
to
keep
the
judge
on
the
bench
and
the
public
entirely
unaware.
Except
they
failed
to
write
a
report
sufficiently
anonymized
to
fool
basic
AI.
As
for
those
apology
letters,
Judge
Ross
had
the
gall
to
look
the
gift
horse
square
in
the
mouth
and
asked
if
she
could
keep
the
letters
vague.
Arguably
the
only
real
penalty
she
expected
to
get
from
this
was
a
wrist
slapping,
and
she
wanted
it
to
hit
even
softer.
AND
THE
OTHER
JUDGES
AGREED.
“The
special
committee
recommends
that
the
Judicial
Council
instruct
the
Subject
Judge
to
use
the
judge’s
best
judgment
in
drafting
letters
of
apology
that
communicate
the
judge’s
sentiments
without
risking
undue
embarrassment
to
the
Subject
Judge
or
the
judiciary.”
The
only
caveat
they
imposed
was
that
the
vague
language
still
be
“sufficiently
specific”
that
the
clerks
could
understand
what
it
was
about.
The
New
York
Times
obtained
one
of
the
apology
letters
that
Judge
Ross
sent
her
clerks
and…
wow.
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.
In
her
defense,
that
probably
is
specific
enough
for
any
clerk
who
sat
10
steps
from
the
taxpayer-supported
Love
Shack.
But
it’s
exactly
the
mockery
of
the
process
that
we
all
imagined
when
we
read
the
report
blessed
her
request
to
keep
the
letters
vague.
If
you
think
—
as
a
lot
of
folks
seem
to
—
that
Ross’s
behavior
so
deeply
compromises
public
faith
in
the
judiciary
that
it
warrants
her
removal
from
the
bench,
how
can
you
look
the
other
way
when
it
comes
to
the
many
other
federal
judges
who…
looked
the
other
way?
They
looked
at
these
facts
and
concluded
that
it
not
only
didn’t
warrant
serious
punishment,
but
that
the
public
should
never
know
who
did
it.
That
seems
like
at
least
as
serious
of
a
blow
to
the
credibility
of
the
judiciary.
Sex,
Lies
and
Secrets:
A
Federal
Judge’s
Trysts
Go
Public
[New
York
Times]
Earlier:
Judge
Eleanor
Ross
Impeachment
Arrives
Right
On
Schedule,
Managing
To
Yet
Again
Botch
The
Standard
Federal
Judge
Had
Sex
In
Chambers
Bringing
New
Meaning
To
Gavel
Bang
Judiciary
Tried
To
Hide
‘Sex
In
Chambers’
Judge’s
Name.
It
Left
A
Roadmap
To
Identify
Eleanor
Ross
Instead.
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or
Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.