Update: we received this response from Peter Kaplan, AO spokesman, today sent “on behalf of Judge Sippel”:

We’re not going to let the Judge Ross scandal disappear.

There are two possible reasons the impeachment resolutions aren’t advancing in the House.

One is that the GOP may be waiting until closer to the election to advance one of them and then use the issue to attack Sen. Ossoff as he faces reelection.

Another more likely reason is that if the House GOP were to advance the Ross resolutions — and not the dozen-plus baseless resolutions against judges who ruled against the Trump administration — it’d lay bare just how unfounded the non-Ross resolutions are.

That, of course, is a trade we’d be willing to make since, to paraphrase the Chief Justice, the way you register frustration with a judge isn’t by impeaching them but by appealing their ruling(s).

In any event, today we’re sharing this letter FTC’s Gabe Roth wrote to the chairman of the Judicial Conference Committee on the Judicial Branch, E.D. Missouri Judge Rodney Sippel, on July 31 asking that his committee review the Eleventh Circuit order in the Ross matter and commit to working branchwide to ensure that judges aren’t signing orders prepared by their law clerks without conducting a meaningful review.

————————

Dear Judge Sippel,

My name is Gabe Roth, and I am executive director of Fix the Court, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization that advocates for greater openness and accountability in the federal courts.

This summer, the fallout resulting from the misconduct committed by N.D. Georgia Judge Eleanor Ross has continued, with the House considering moving impeachment resolutions and the Senate last week introducing a resolution condemning her behavior.

Though the headline-grabbing issue here has been Judge Ross’ decision to have sex in chambers during work hours and then lie about it to her chief judges, the complaint revealed a larger, branchwide issue: the fact that some judges routinely sign orders prepared by their law clerks without conducting a meaningful review.

In the weeks following the revelation of the Judge Ross complaint, many former law clerks commented that it wasn’t at all rare for their judges to offer limited oversight of their work in certain instances.

Although some orders judges sign are routine, many are not, and even routine ones deserve a judge’s full attention because their decisions carry significant weight.

That’s why I am requesting the Judicial Conference Committee on the Judicial Branch conduct a review of this practice (or, technically, nonpractice). This review should determine whether Judicial Conference policies should be updated to ensure that judges know exactly what they’re signing whenever they approve an order.

Finally, I am writing this to you as the chairman of the Judicial Conference Committee on the Judicial Branch. It is unclear if you remain the chairman since neither the AO nor the FJC publicizes this information. Please forward this to the proper judge if you are no longer on the Committee.