Name And Status Changes On The Federal Bench
posted by Dan Filler
Reading a complimentary piece about the tough Judge Kristi DuBose, of the Southern District of Alabama, I recalled that Judge DuBose once visited my juvenile justice class at the University of Alabama. That was way back when, in 1999, during my first year of teaching. And back then, she was Kristi Lee – Senator Jeff Session’s chief counsel in Washington. In 2000 she became an Article I federal magistrate judge. And in 2005 she became a full fledged Article III district judge. Can the 11th Circuit be far behind?
I found two aspects of her life story curious. First, she changed her name while on the bench (ableit while she was still an Article I.) This must have been slightly disconcerting to attorneys who presumably then made mistakes in both filings and courtroom argument. But it’s also strikes me – and perhaps only me – as a little odd. One of the key aspects of the federal judiciary is that it feels solid and consistent. Although name changes are not substantive, it seems to me that they undermine a certain perception of continuity. Can you imagine if a Supreme Court Justice changed her – or his, for that matter – name? How would we deal with Justice Ginsburg if she divorced and remarried George Clooney. This could really happen! Would we then call her Justice Clooney? The Former Justice Ginsburg? Justice Clooney nee Ginsburg? Pehaps the stakes are lower on the district bench, but what of the circuit courts? All of this leads me to wonder: how many federal judges have sported more than one family name during their terms of service?
Second question. How often do federal judges make the shift from Article I to Article III? If it happens often, you’d think that the study of these creatures would be fertile ground for some empirical research. Does lifetime tenure really matter? If the transition is rare, why is that? Are Article I judges typically non-political creatures? You’d be hard pressed to find better preparatory job experience for an Article III position than a few years as a magistrate judge. If only there was an Article I Groupie around to ask these questions.
August 29, 2006 at 12:00 am
Posted in: Culture
Print This Post
Responses (8)
Paul Horwitz - August 29, 2006 at 12:25 am
Didn’t Judge Dubina of the 11th Circuit make the long march up, starting as a magistrate and advancing to the district court before hitting the appellate bench? My memory may be failing me on this, but I had thought he did.
John Armstrong - August 29, 2006 at 2:16 am
How would we deal with Justice Ginsburg if she divorced and remarried George Clooney. This could really happen! Would we then call her Justice Clooney? The Former Justice Ginsburg? Justice Clooney nee Ginsburg?
Well, “nee” means “born” so that’s out. I cast my vote for “The Justice Formerly Known As Ginsburg”.
heynow - August 29, 2006 at 8:54 am
you really need more to do with you time than to post this stuff. You really think practicing attorneys have so little to worry about that they feel a judge’s name change is “disconcerting.”
Erika Cunliffe - August 29, 2006 at 9:32 am
There are a number of Judges in the Northern District of Illinois who went from Article I to Article III status. Rebecca Pallmeyer, Joan Gottschall, Elaine Bucklo (I think), and Joan Lefkow went from Magistrate to Bankruptcy to Article III. I think this is fairly common.
Milbarge - August 29, 2006 at 1:27 pm
Judge Charles Wilson of the 11th Cir. went from magistrate judge to US Atty to circuit judge, so he went from Article I to Article II to Article III in that order.
rvanderv - August 29, 2006 at 9:09 pm
Chief Judge James G. Carr of the Northern District of Ohio served as a Magistrate Judge before becoming an Article III judge.
Glynis Bethel - May 4, 2010 at 5:37 am
GOD is good.
What in the world are you talking about? Who cares if Kristi Dubose changed her name? I am too concerned about the illegal actions of this woman while on the bench. I have been victimized by Kristi Dubose and I am going to get her impeached with the help of the good LORD. The main topic of discussion here should be how this woman bans people from filing lawsuits when the law allows someone without the money available at the time to file suit when his or her rights are being taken away. Also, she grants “Summary Judgments” when the 7th Amendment states that it is a right to have a jury trial when the money exceeds $20. This corrupt judge illegaly tossed my case because I had a small dispute with Jeff Reinert in the LOBBY of the courthouse. She still has not won because I will be refiling the SAME EXACT lawsuit in he Federal court until I receive vindication. If GOD be for me WHO can be against me? She and Casey Rodgers are both criminals and I am praying that BOTH will be impeached and removed from office either this way or a heart attack of some kind sent by GOD according to Psalm 37.
Bob White - September 2, 2010 at 7:52 pm
Hello Glynis Bethyl. Please shut up and go away. A web search of your name returns many examples of your closed minded, holier than thou rantings. Leave Judge Dubose and all the other people alone. You are only frustrating good people doing their jobs and needlessly wasting my tax money each time you file another frivolous lawsuit. You call yourself a priestess. That is tha same as saying you are a god which is blasphemous. When your judgment day comes, God will not have pity on you for your selfish behaviour. That is after He stops laughing. Good day and go away.
Leave a Reply