Watchdog Files Complaint Over Judge Demanding Gender Quotas

A conservative judicial ⁤watchdog, the Article III⁣ Project (A3P), has filed a formal misconduct complaint against Judge M.Casey Rodgers of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida. ‌The complaint alleges that during a⁤ management conference related ​too a multi-district litigation involving an⁢ injectable ⁣birth control,‌ Judge Rodgers expressed that sex should be ⁣a criterion in selecting leadership counsel, ⁢suggesting that “females need to ⁣be adequately represented.” A3P‍ argues that this reflects⁢ bias and improper⁣ judicial favoritism,‍ violating the principle of ⁢impartiality by ⁢prioritizing gender ‌over qualifications. They request a thorough investigation into⁢ the⁢ judge’s comments to ensure equal treatment of all attorneys nonetheless of sex. This complaint follows previous controversies involving A3P,including an ‍incident⁣ with judge Michael Ponsor,who apologized for ‍criticizing Justice Samuel Alito in an op-ed.


A conservative judicial watchdog filed a formal complaint of misconduct against a federal judge in Florida for saying sex should be part of the determinative criteria for legal representation in multi-district litigation related to an injectable form of birth control.

The Article III Project (A3P) submitted the complaint Thursday against Judge M. Casey Rodgers of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida for comments made during a First Case Management Conference “dealing with Depo-Provera, an injectable form of birth control, which is facing litigation.”

According to A3P, Judge Rodgers “discriminatorily suggested that sex should be a relevant factor in selecting leadership counsel for the multidistrict litigation,” stating, “females need to be adequately represented in your leadership.”

“This remark reflects an explicit preference for females in the allocation of professional roles and responsibilities,” the complaint reads. “By implying that sex — rather than qualifications, experience, or merit — should influence selection for MDL leadership, Judge Rodgers engaged in conduct that constitutes impermissible bias and judicial misconduct.”

“By suggesting that female attorneys should be prioritized for leadership roles based on the nature of the case, Judge Rodgers openly endorsed sex-based decision-making, which constitutes improper judicial favoritism and violates the principle of impartiality,” said Mike Davis, the founder and president of A3P. “It should go without saying that Judge Rogers’ statement that ‘that doesn’t mean I’m looking for every single leadership to be a female,’ does not somehow justify the express preference for women.”

Judge Rodgers, who is presiding over thousands of individual cases, was talking about the lead attorneys comprising the leadership committee for pre-trial purposes, who essentially represent all the cases, needing women to present the cases.

“Accordingly, I respectfully request that this complaint be thoroughly investigated and that appropriate corrective action be taken to ensure that all attorneys, regardless of sex, are afforded equal treatment in these proceedings,” Davis added.

Davis’ group has recently filed similar complaints against other judges. In December, A3P compelled Senior Judge Michael Ponsor of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts to apologize for an op-ed published in the New York Times. Ponsor had condemned U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito for flying flags in a manner characterized by leftists as emblematic of partisan extremism. Last spring, The New York Times released a series of stories designed to smear Justice Alito’s patriotism over a pair of flags flown at his residencies in New Jersey and Virginia. Alito’s wife hung an American flag upside down following an argument with a neighbor over a profane anti-Trump sign, and in New Jersey, the pair flew an “Appeal to Heaven” banner with roots dating to the war for independence.

“Flying those flags was tantamount to sticking a ‘Stop the steal’ bumper sticker on your car,” Ponsor wrote in the Times. “You just don’t do it.”

The Times fabricated the flag controversies just before the high court began to deliver consequential rulings on guns, censorship, and charges for the defendants in cases related to the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

Ponsor issued an apology after U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Chief Judge Albert Diaz concluded the op-ed amounted to misconduct and damaged public confidence in the judicial system.

“Among other transgressions, Ponsor, a 1994 Clinton appointee who sits in Springfield, Mass., was found to violate rules against actions that ‘detract from the dignity’ of a judge’s office and harm ‘public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary,’” according to the Wall Street Journal.


Tristan Justice is a national correspondent for The Federalist and the co-author of “Fat and Unhappy: How ‘Body Positivity’ Is Killing Us (and How to Save Yourself).” He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at [email protected]. Sign up for Tristan’s email newsletter here. Buy “Fat and Unhappy” here.



" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles

Sponsored Content
Back to top button
Available for Amazon Prime
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker