Here Comes the Judge!
A sneak peek into a little judicial "activism" going on in one Georgia jurist's chambers
In my lifetime I’ve witnessed a range of what I consider positive changes to American culture, including a dramatic shift in the public’s attitude about littering, a society-wide recognition of the problem of bullying, or how we’ve all collectively learned to hate the Dallas Cowboys. But one of the most stark changes has to be the increase in what we now term “sex positivity.”
Take the example of President Bill Clinton, who back in the late ‘90s was vilified, especially by Evangelical Christians and right-wing politicians and pundits, for engaging in certain intimate activities outside the confines of marriage. Yet today many of those same devout Christians and Republicans who were so critical of Clinton’s peccadilloes fall all over one another to lionize Donald Trump as a paragon of virtue — despite this president’s many highly publicized infidelities, which even included paying hush money to a porn actress he slept with soon after his wife gave birth. Talk about sex positive!
We’re even far more open-minded these days about so-called “self-love.” Remember in 1991 when actor Paul Reubens (aka Pee Wee Herman) had his career destroyed after an arrest for “indecent exposure” in a Sarasota, Florida adult movie theater? Or in 1994 when Bill Clinton’s Surgeon General, Dr. Joycelyn Elders, was forced to resign after suggesting that masturbation should be a part of sex education curriculum in schools? The culture was so sex negative that even sex with yourself was off limits!
By contrast, in 2020 CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin was forced to take a leave of absence after being caught openly masturbating in the middle of a work Zoom call with 15-20 other participants, but then, just eight months later, he was welcomed back to the CNN airwaves with open arms – if perhaps less than enthusiastic handshakes.
Rough Justice
Sadly, it’s not all rosy on the sex positivity front these days. Here I’m specifically referring to the case of Eleanor Ross, a U.S. District Judge in Georgia who recently faced disciplinary action just because, according to a recent CNBC story, “on multiple occasions, the judge engaged in sexual activity with a uniformed law enforcement officer in chambers during work hours within earshot of the judge’s staff.”
The news story didn’t specify precisely what the judge’s staff overheard, but I like to imagine the sounds of “sexual activity” included passionate cries of “Ooh, order in the court!”, “Sustained!” and “I’ll allow it! I’ll allow it!”
Judge Ross initially denied the allegations, calling them “outrageous” and “baseless,” but eventually fessed up. In her defense, she noted that she never actually engaged in sexual activity with a uniformed law enforcement officer, because, technically speaking, “the officer always removed his uniform beforehand.”
OK, I made that last part up. And much as I’d like to, I also can’t confirm that courthouse employees said the revelations gave a new meaning to all the times when Judge Ross told the police officer in question, “I would like to see you in my chambers.”
What is true is that as part of her punishment, Judge Ross was ordered to write letters of apology to six former law clerks who had been interviewed about the allegations. Considering her seeming lack of contrition, I’d really love to read one of these letters.
“I’m so sorry for having loud sex in my chambers within earshot of you all. I hold myself entirely responsible and realize I should never have engaged in these activities without first installing wall-to-wall soundproofing.”
Speaking of which, the CNBC article states that the investigation involved “conducting testing in a chamber with a similar layout to determine whether law clerks seated outside chambers could hear sounds from within” and “arranging forensic testing of a couch cushion in the subject judge’s chambers.”
I love the idea of a crack squad of FBI investigators analyzing the courthouse wall thickness, the squeakiness of the couch springs, the acoustic properties of varying pitches of amorous vocalizations, etc. In another omission from the article, there’s no mention whether officials brought in adult film actresses to produce realistic-sounding passionate groans, screams and wails.
The Judge Gets Judged
Holding illicit liaisons was not the only complaint against Judge Ross, either. One law clerk reported that the judge “failed to mentor the law clerks and edit their work, displayed visible anger to the law clerks, including yelling and cursing, and, on one occasion, told staff that the judge had ‘too many martinis the night before’ at an event for a District Attorney.” Why Judge Ross should be disciplined for emphasizing for staff the importance of understanding one’s own limits at professional functions is not addressed.
But the overall picture suggests that courthouse employees working under Judge Ross – well, for her, anyway – didn’t think too highly of their boss, which may be why they were happy to rat out her secret smash sessions. No doubt she is now regretting not being a more attentive and considerate supervisor. In particular she likely laments not rewarding her law clerks for their hard work — and discretion — with gifts. Gifts like, say, high-end noise canceling headphones.
But now that the investigation has concluded with Judge Ross receiving an official reprimand, she has returned to the bench where she is again hearing cases – a true testament to the sex positive society we now enjoy. And who knows, one day she may be viewed as a groundbreaker, a pioneer who ushered in a new era when loud, intrusive workplace sex is not only tolerated, but actively encouraged!
And just when companies have been looking for ways to convince employees to stop working from home and come back into the office too…
I’ve always wondered if judges wore clothes beneath their robes - now we know. . .
I have a friend who is a judge (not the ones I sat in front of on numerous occasions). He often wears a Grateful Dead tour T-shirt and basketball shorts!