Numerous U.S. Federal Appeals Court Judges Attend Privately-Funded Seminars at Luxury Resorts: A Closer Look

In a revealing exposé, it has come to light that thirty-one distinguished U.S. federal appeals court judges have participated in an astonishing 76 occasions of privately-funded seminars since the year 2021. These seminars, purportedly designed to be educational, have raised eyebrows due to their striking resemblance to luxurious paid vacations. A prominent judicial watchdog organization shared the findings on Monday.
 

In a comprehensive letter addressed to the head of the federal judiciary's administrative arm, the non-profit organization "Fix the Court" expressed concerns regarding the ethical implications of these seminar arrangements. Upon meticulous examination of disclosure reports that detail judges' attendance at these seminars, Fix the Court identified a pressing need to ensure adherence to ethical standards in this practice. However, the organization highlighted that its tally of resort-based trips could be more underestimated, attributing this to incomplete information regarding specific accommodations and instances where judges had engaged in undisclosed trips.
 
The message presented by Fix the Court called upon U.S. District Roslynn Mauskopf, the authoritative figure overseeing the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, to collaborate with the Judicial Conference. This policy-making body within the judiciary system should take a closer look at the seminars and impose stricter requirements on judges to furnish more comprehensive financial details concerning these trips. The Administrative Office had yet to provide an official response as of Monday.
 
According to regulations introduced in 2007, judges must file disclosure reports if their travel, sustenance, lodging, and other related expenses exceed $480 when funded by private entities. Fix the Court, having examined a range of seminars attended by numerous appeals court judges, pointed out that many of these events seem to "bear closer resemblance to opulent leisure getaways rather than opportunities to stay abreast of evolving trends and advancements in the legal field." The organization criticized the apparent lavishness and ideological undertones in some of these seminars, which it deemed inconsistent with Canon 2 of the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges. This code stipulates that judges must meticulously avoid improper conduct and any perception of impropriety in their actions.
 
A recent instance that came under scrutiny was the attendance of five judges in June at a weeklong event organized by George Mason University's Antonin Scalia Law School. This event occurred at the Alyeska Resort in Girdwood, Alaska, renowned for its picturesque landscapes and winter-time skiing opportunities. Fix the Court observed that the presentations delivered during this event seemed more politically driven than expected at a purportedly impartial educational colloquium. In a notable example, one presentation criticized past Supreme Court decisions that the judges are legally obligated to uphold. This included an essay branding the court's landmark 2015 decision to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide as one of its "worst" decisions.
 
The judges who attended this Alaska event were all appointed by the Republican Party. Among them, U.S. Circuit Judge Douglas Ginsburg of the D.C. Circuit was particularly active, participating in 12 out of the 76 resort-based events tracked by Fix the Court—the highest number recorded among all the judges.
 
Notable attendees during the Alaska event included U.S. Circuit Judges Don Willett of the 5th Circuit, Frank Easterbrook of the 7th Circuit, and Danielle Forrest and Lawrence VanDyke of the 9th Circuit. Despite requests for comment, these judges remained silent on the matter.
 
In essence, the revelation of these resort-based seminars and the questionable nature of their content has prompted concerns about ethical standards within the judiciary. As public scrutiny intensifies, pressure mounts on relevant authorities to address these issues and uphold the principles of impartiality and transparency essential to a fair and just legal system.