The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Judge Pauline Newman’s challenge to her suspension from the Federal Circuit, a move Newman’s lawyers say was used to sideline a judge they accused of being unable or unwilling to remove her through other means.
On Monday, the Supreme Court turned away Judge Pauline Newman’s bid to return to hearing cases on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Newman, 98, has been suspended from active service after concerns were raised about her health and fitness. In the decision, the Supreme Court declined to take up her request to review that suspension.
Newman has served on the Federal Circuit since 1984. where the court—established in 1982—hears appeals involving international trade. patents. trademarks. veterans’ benefits and money claims against the U.S. government. Across more than four decades on the bench. Newman has authored more than 300 dissenting opinions and earned the nickname the “Great Dissenter.”.
Her suspension began three years ago. when the Judicial Council for the Federal Circuit—which is made up of the circuit judges in active service—suspended her from hearing cases. The Federal Circuit’s chief judge. Kimberly Moore. also told Newman she could either retire or consider senior status. a form of semi-retirement in which judges take on a lighter caseload. Newman refused both options. Moore then entered an order that identified a judicial complaint against Newman. then 96. and found “there is probable cause to believe that Judge Newman’s health has left her without the capacity to perform the work of an active judge and that her habitual delays are prejudicial to the efficient administration of justice.”.
Moore’s filing referenced health issues Newman suffered in the summer of 2021 and a fainting episode in 2022. It said judges and staff on the Federal Circuit had expressed concerns about Newman’s inability to keep up with her workload. A special committee of two Federal Circuit judges, along with Moore, investigated Newman’s fitness to continue serving. They ordered Newman to submit to neurological and neuropsychological testing. asked her to turn over medical records. and requested she participate in an interview.
Newman did provide expert reports from two doctors. But after that review, the committee recommended that Newman “not be permitted to hear any cases” for one year, subject to renewal. The Judicial Council approved that recommendation in September 2023.
After her suspension, Newman sought review through the Judicial Conference of the United States, the policy-making body for the federal courts. That request was rejected in February 2024. The Federal Circuit then renewed her suspension for another year in September 2024, and again in August 2025.
While she was suspended, Newman filed a lawsuit against Moore and other Federal Circuit judges. She sought to prevent the Judicial Council from taking action against her in the future. Newman argued the panel violated the Constitution by effectively removing her from office despite life tenure protections and denied her due process.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ultimately ruled against Newman, finding that the Disability Act prevents litigants from bringing certain constitutional challenges to a judicial council’s authority.
In urging the Supreme Court to take up her case. Newman’s lawyers argued Moore was circumventing constitutional protections for federal judges in an attempt to sideline a judge she did not want to serve with. They also accused Federal Circuit judges of trying to silence a colleague who often dissents.
In a filing to the Supreme Court. Newman’s lawyers wrote that “This administrative removal of a judge who is famous for dissenting from her colleagues. by those same colleagues. with judicial refusal to review the merits of the action. undermines the judicial independence that is a vital foundation of our constitutional design.” They continued: “Every judge who gets crosswise with her chief judge or her colleagues must now worry whether similar tactics could be used to remove them.”.
The Justice Department, which represented Moore and the other judges, urged the Supreme Court to turn away Newman’s case.
The New Civil Liberties Alliance. representing Newman. said it was disappointed by the Supreme Court’s denial but would continue seeking reinstatement. “It is a dark day for the independence of the federal judiciary. ” Mark Chenoweth. the group’s president. said in a statement. Chenoweth added that the cert denial means Newman’s due process and other complaints about how Chief Judge Moore and the Federal Circuit Judicial Council treated her would not receive a merits decision from an Article III court. “That is utterly inexcusable and truly inexplicable.”.
Supreme Court Pauline Newman Federal Circuit Judicial Council Kimberly Moore judicial fitness due process disability act Great Dissenter