In Defense of Chief Judge Pryor
With all due respect to my friend Josh Blackman, I think he has been unduly critical of Chief Judge Bill Pryor for his role in connection with the sordid doings of U.S. District Court Judge Eleanor Ross. Here’s why:
After one of Judge Ross's law clerks alleged that Judge Ross was conducting a long-term extramarital affair in her chambers with an high-ranking Atlanta police officer, all within earshot of her clerks and other court personnel, Pryor initiated an investigation. Ross denied the allegations and said this was simply a case of sour grapes by a disgruntled, under-performing law clerk.
Rather than accepting Judge Ross’s blanket denial of misconduct, Pryor continued the investigation, hiring lawyers and investigators to pursue the matter, which prompted other law clerks to come forward to back up what the law clerk had said. The fact that Pryor pressed ahead with the inquiry prompted Ross to “lawyer up” and admit her misconduct within a matter of days, short-circuiting the need to continue the investigation. Moreover, Pryor insisted that Ross issue a letter of apology that was supposed to be “sufficiently specific” to “make clear” to the clerks who provided evidence against her (at great professional risk to their budding careers) what she was apologizing for.
When Ross’s initial, woefully insufficient, feeble non-attempt at an apology was made public, Pryor did not let the issue pass; instead, he initiated a second inquiry about whether Ross had “failed to send adequate letters of apology to [her] former clerks.” This immediately prompted Ross to issue a more fulsome apology, which Pryor insisted be provided to the media, including the NY Times, which had published her initial “apology.”
What more should Pryor have done? He is, after all, only one member of the judicial council that decided to issue a private reprimand to Judge Ross that included barring her from serving as chief judge of the district of serving in any other leadership role as a judge.
There is also a strong argument that could be made that Judge Ross committed a federal crime when she initially lied to Pryor about what had transpired in her chambers, but, of course, Pryor is a judge, not a federal prosecutor.
A strong argument (one I completely agree with) can also be made that Ross should be impeached and removed from the bench, but Pryor is on the federal bench himself, not in the House of Representatives, which is the body that will ultimately decide whether to impeach her.
Two Republican Congressmen from Georgia (where Judge Ross presides) have now introduced articles of impeachment against Ross. It is worth noting, though, that it was largely through Chief Judge Pryor’s efforts that this scandalous conduct has been brought to light. He deserves praise for this, not subtle (or not so subtle) condemnation.