ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal News Blogs -> Law Blog - WSJ.com

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal News

: Law Blog - WSJ.com

House Impeaches New Orleans Judge Porteous

By Nathan Koppel

ADVERTISEMENTS

porteousThis just in: The House of Representatives voted unanimously today to impeach New Orleans federal judge Thomas Porteous.

Here’s an AP report on the vote ─ a very rare rebuke.

Only 14 federal judges have ever been impeached.

The House approved four impeachment articles charging Porteous with taking payoffs and lying under oath. The case now goes to the Senate, where a two-thirds vote is needed to convict the judge of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

As we explained here, Porteous has been accused of soliciting money from lawyers who appeared before him.

The Justice Department conducted an earlier investigation into the bribery allegations and decided not to indict Porteous. However, a federal judicial panel in September 2008 suspended the Clinton appointee, saying his failure to disclose personal gifts bought by lawyers who had appeared before him had brought "disrepute to the federal judiciary."

(Here's a WSJ article on the case.)

If convicted in the Senate, Judge Porteous would become the eighth federal judge in U.S. history to be impeached and convicted, the AP reports. It has been 20 years since a judge was removed through impeachment.

Wisconsin Republican James Sensenbrenner said Judge Porteous’s misconduct was so serious that he’s “one of a kind and it’s time for him to receive his comeuppance.”

Richard Westling, the judge’s attorney, said the vote was expected. But, he said, “we are surprised by the claims of some representatives that the Justice Department did not bring criminal charges because of the statute of limitations. . . The decision not to prosecute was based purely on a lack of sufficient credible evidence. Unfortunately, the House has decided to disregard the Justice Department's decision and to more forward with impeachment. As a result, we will now turn to the Senate to seek a full and fair hearing of all of the evidence.”


Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on March 11, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0164 secs (new cache)