Judiciary

Judge Sutton concludes there was not much to the complaint submitted by the Department of Justice.

Jonathan H. Adler | 2.4.2026 12:41 PM

On July 29, the Department of Justice filed a complaint against district court Judge James Boasberg, alleging that the Judge's comments to the Judicial Conference suggesting he was concerned that the Trump Administration might disobey district court orders violated multiple Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges.

To avoid potential conflicts within the federal courts in D.C. (where Boasberg sits), the complaint was transferred to the Judicial Council of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

In December, Chief Judge Jeffrey Sutton of the Sixth Circuit dismissed the complaint, and the order of dismissal was released this week.

Judge Sutton's memorandum and order first outlines the potential bases for dismissal:

After conducting an initial review, the chief judge of a circuit may dismiss a complaint of judicial misconduct if he concludes: (A) that the claimed conduct, even if it occurred, "is not prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts"; (B) that the complaint "is directly related to the merits of a decision or procedural ruling"; (C) that the complaint is "frivolous" because the charges are wholly unsupported; or (D) that the complaint "lack[s] sufficient evidence to raise an inference that misconduct has occurred." Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(A)–(D); see 28 U.S.C. § 352(a), (b).

This complaint warrants dismissal.

On the substance of the complaint, Chief Judge Sutton writes:

The primary theory of the complaint is that the judge made an improper statement at the Judicial Conference on March 11 about the risk that the Administration would not comply with federal judicial rulings. This claim fails to establish a cognizable basis of misconduct. First, it lacks "sufficient evidence" to support the allegations. Judicial-Conduct........

© Reason.com