WASHINGTON — A federal judge engaged in sexual activity with a law enforcement officer in her chambers during work hours, conduct that occurred between 2023 and 2025. Staff members reportedly heard the activity. The Eleventh Circuit received a complaint on May 22.
The judge was largely allowed to remain on the bench. The law enforcement officer involved, however, faces potential repercussions — an outcome that highlights uneven accountability between the two parties.
Separately, Judicial Ethics Opinion 25-195 mandates that a part-time judge who solely owns and operates a company must choose between the judicial office and the company's political activities. Such a judge cannot allow the company to make political contributions or engage in other political activity prohibited by the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct.
Chief Justice John Roberts and his wife, Jane Sullivan Roberts, face a distinct set of questions. She has remained a partner at the recruiting firm Macrae for more than a decade, placing lawyers at firms that appear before federal courts where her husband sits. The scope of payments she has received has not been publicly disclosed.
The Judicial Conference's Advisory Opinion 107, issued in 2009, permits judges to forgo recusal in cases involving firms where a spouse recruits. Roberts has not recused himself from such cases, operating within the parameters that opinion sets — parameters that critics argue are too narrow.
Taken together, the episodes — in-chambers conduct, a business ethics opinion and a sitting chief justice's financial ties — place the federal judiciary under sustained public scrutiny and raise questions about whether existing accountability standards are applied consistently across the bench.
