A federal judge who quit the bench ostensibly so he could warn others about President Trump’s supposed threats to the rule of law may have done so to avoid a misconduct inquiry, National Public Radio (NPR) reported recently.
In November, Massachusetts District Court Judge Mark Wolf wrote an essay in The Atlantic where he explained his decision to formally resign so he would no longer be “restrained” by judicial canons that forbid political statements by jurists. President Ronald Reagan first appointed Wolf in 1985.
“President Donald Trump is using the law for partisan purposes, targeting his adversaries while sparing his friends and donors from investigation, prosecution, and possible punishment,” Judge Wolf said in explaining his decision. MS NOW gleefully platformed the jurist so he could warn others. He also told PBS that Trump was “uniquely dangerous.”
Trump’s targeting of people “is contrary to everything that I have stood for in my more than 50 years in the Department of Justice and on the bench,” the judge said. He assumed senior status 12 years prior.
“The White House’s assault on the rule of law is so deeply disturbing to me that I feel compelled to speak out,” Wolf huffed and puffed. “Silence, for me, is now intolerable.”
And yet, his resignation allowed him to stay “silent” about a pending inquiry into his misconduct, NPR now reports.
“Wolf’s decision to retire coincided with an inquiry by another federal judge into potential misconduct, according to newly published orders,” NPR reported on Feb. 4. “That inquiry found probable cause to believe an unnamed jurist had engaged in misconduct by creating a hostile workplace for court employees.”
A source told NPR that the judge is Wolf himself. The resignation ended the investigation, the news outlet reported.
U.S. Appeals Court Judge David Barron conducted the inquiry. It looked into allegations that Wolf had created a “hostile workplace.”
NPR reported:
The order did not provide details about the alleged misconduct but stated it could include “treating litigants, attorneys, judicial employees or others in a demonstrably egregious and hostile manner” or creating a hostile workplace for court employees. Judge Barron ultimately concluded that further action was unnecessary because of “intervening events.”
The accused judge offered few comments to NPR.
“I don’t know what to say but at the moment nothing. I’m sitting here getting ready to leave for two weeks and working frantically,” he said. “All right, my phone number’s public; you called it.”
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY