A conservative organization founded by lawyer and Donald Trump ally Mike Davis has filed a misconduct complaint against a federal judge in North Carolina, accusing him of backtracking on his decision to semi-retire for political reasons. The group, called the Article III Project (A3P), claims Judge James Wynn Jr., a Democratic appointee to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, reversed his retirement decision to prevent a Republican president from filling his seat after the 2024 election.
A3P, which says it fights against liberal influence in the courts, submitted its complaint on Monday and shared it publicly. They argue that Wynn’s decision to stay on the bench undermines public trust in the judiciary, labeling it as politically motivated. Wynn, who was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2009, announced his retirement plans earlier this year but rescinded them last week in a letter to President Joe Biden.
The timing of Wynn’s decision raised eyebrows, coming just days after Biden’s nominee to replace him, North Carolina Solicitor General Ryan Park, withdrew his name. Park stepped back because he lacked enough Senate votes for confirmation, according to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Republican leaders, including Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, sharply criticized Wynn’s move. McConnell even hinted at more ethics complaints to come, saying on social media that Wynn “earned” the scrutiny.
This isn’t the only instance of judges changing their minds after the election. A3P also filed complaints against two other judges: U.S. District Judge Max Cogburn Jr. in North Carolina and U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley in Ohio. Both judges had planned to take senior status, a form of semi-retirement, but decided to remain active after the 2024 presidential election.
A3P claims that Wynn violated two key ethical rules for judges. First, they say his actions breach the rule against political involvement, arguing that reversing a retirement decision based on election results is inherently political. Second, they contend his actions damage public confidence in the judiciary, as judges are expected to stay impartial and above the political fray.
Wynn isn’t the only judge facing scrutiny. Judge Cogburn, an Obama appointee from the Western District of North Carolina, quietly removed his name from the list of future vacancies. Judge Marbley, appointed by Bill Clinton, also withdrew his retirement plans in late 2023. Both cases involved complications with the Senate’s “blue slip” policy, which allows home-state senators to support or block judicial nominees. For Marbley, Ohio senators J.D. Vance, a Republican, and Democrat Sherrod Brown were at odds, while Cogburn’s situation involved resistance from Senators Tillis and Ted Budd of North Carolina.
It’s not every day that a judge has a retirement party and then tells the President he’s going to keep his job. I expect that Judge Wynn will face significant ethics complaints based on Canons 2 and 5 of the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges, followed by serial recusal demands from… https://t.co/NI6QpEPzrv
— Leader McConnell (@LeaderMcConnell) December 15, 2024
This controversy highlights the political gridlock in filling federal judicial seats, particularly in states with split political representation. George Washington University law professor John P. Collins pointed out that with Senate Democrats lacking the votes to confirm Biden’s nominees, judges in red states face especially steep challenges. Even if these seats eventually open, they’re likely to go to conservative replacements.
The situation has sparked heated debate about judicial ethics and the delicate balance between politics and the courts. At its core, it’s a story about how deeply intertwined the judiciary has become with political battles—and what that means for the future of impartial justice in the United States.
Rightfully so, they’re under fire! This clearly shows that they aren’t and probably were never impartial jurists in their rulings.