Federal judge had extramarital relations in chambers 'in earshot of law clerks': report

A federal district judge under the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has received a "private reprimand" from a judicial conduct committee for allegedly carrying on an extramarital affair with a law enforcement officer in chambers, and "in earshot of law clerks," according to Bloomberg Law.

The specific judge at the center of the allegations has not been publicly identified.

"A special committee for the Eleventh Circuit found the judge ... engaged in sexual intercourse in 'chambers and during business hours' over the course of a two-year relationship, according to the panel’s recently released report," the report reads in part. "This relationship 'demonstrated a gross lack of judgment' and resulted in a 'chambers workplace that was extremely uncomfortable and troubling for clerks,' the report said."

"The officer, who is also unnamed, is described as a division commander who has worked for the police department since 1998," said the report. "All six former clerks who were interviewed described seeing the officer visit chambers, and two clerks reported hearing either 'kissing sounds,' 'moaning' or both from the judge’s office, while a third recounted hearing music playing during a visit, the report said."

According to the report, the judge was not involved with any cases that included that specific officer or their police department — but "because the judge didn’t disclose the affair, this 'appears to be the result of happenstance' and not any efforts by the judge."

Zach Smith, a senior legal fellow for the far-right Heritage Foundation, was infuriated by the report.

"Unacceptable. Impeachment and removal from office is the remedy for this kind of brazen misconduct. A private reprimand (where the judge’s name isn’t even published) is not appropriate punishment for this escapade," Smith wrote on X. "At a minimum, this judge should be named-and-shamed. But remember, Article III provides that federal judges 'shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour.' This DOES NOT qualify under any definition."