Pauline Newman, the oldest federal judge in the United States, has accused her colleagues on the Federal Circuit’s Judicial Council of trying to control public opinion by delaying the release of key documents related to her suspension. At 97, Newman has found herself in a legal battle with the court she’s served for nearly four decades.
Last year, Newman was sidelined by the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., after refusing to undergo neurological tests or provide medical records during an investigation into her mental health. Earlier this month, she requested the release of documents about her suspension and her mental health, insisting that the information only affects her privacy, which she doesn’t mind exposing.
Newman’s legal team believes the delay in releasing these records is an attempt to manipulate the narrative. In a new motion filed on December 26, her lawyers claimed that the Judicial Council is withholding the documents to shape media coverage in their favor. They argued that Newman simply wants her case to be treated like any other—open to the public.
Instead of directly addressing why the documents should remain sealed, Newman’s lawyers say the council offered vague justifications like protecting the “fairness and integrity” of the investigation and preventing “skewed public disclosures.” Newman’s team dismissed these reasons as baseless, accusing the council of using them as a cover to keep the legal process one-sided.
The Federal Circuit has promised to release the requested documents in “a matter of weeks,” but Newman’s lawyers are skeptical about the timeline and the reasons for the delay. They questioned why additional weeks are needed and how the delay would improve the investigation’s fairness.
According to Newman’s legal team, these delays allow the Federal Circuit’s Chief Judge Kimberly Moore, whom Newman has sued, to control the flow of information. Newman’s lawsuit names all the judges on the Judicial Conduct and Disability committee, accusing them of unfairly targeting her.
The case has drawn attention partly because Newman’s lawyers argue that she remains mentally sharp, despite her age. Appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1984, Newman has been described by witnesses as “unusually cognitively intact” and appearing much younger than her 97 years.
The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), a public-interest law firm representing Newman, has repeatedly said that she is capable of continuing her work on the bench. Greg Dolin, a senior lawyer at the NCLA, said the public deserves to see the documents, adding, “Sunshine is the best disinfectant.” Dolin accused the Federal Circuit of pursuing a predetermined goal of removing Newman from her position, even though medical evaluations confirm her competence.
Newman’s initial lawsuit was dismissed earlier this year, but her legal team has appealed, arguing that the process against her has been unfair. They claim that the Judicial Council released its findings about her mental health without giving her a chance to respond, allegedly to gain favorable media coverage.
This fight over transparency has raised broader questions about fairness and openness in how judicial matters are handled. For now, Newman’s legal battle continues, with her team pushing for the release of the documents that they believe will set the record straight.
