An Update On The Leak From The Judicial Conference

And DOJ files a misconduct complaint against Judge Boasberg.

Two weeks ago, I wrote about a leaked memorandum from the Judicial Conference, which was published by Margot Cleveland at the Federalist. At the time, the Federalist did not publish the entire memorandum, but only included excerpts.

In a thread, Margot explained that she didn't publish the "lengthy" memorandum because it had "nearly 20 pages of internal discussions, none of which had ANYTHING to do with Boasberg's comments." Margot added that "Those discussions provided neither content or context to Boasberg's comments and were either held no news value or in my judgment and that of my editor . . ."

Margot also provides the entire relevant paragraph concerning Judge Boasberg's comments:

District of the District of Columbia Chief Judge James Boasberg next raised his colleagues' concerns that the Administration would disregard rulings of federal courts leading to a constitutional crisis.  Chief Justice Roberts expressed hope that would not happen and in turn no constitutional crisis would materialize. The Chief Justice talked about how his interactions with the President have been civil and respectful, such as the President thanking him at the state of the union address for administering the oath.

Cleveland is not the only person who has this memorandum. The Department of Justice filed a misconduct complaint against Judge Boasberg. Footnote 2 references the memorandum.

On March 11, 2025, at one of the Conference's semiannual meetings, Judge Boasberg disregarded its history, tradition, and purpose to push a wholly unsolicited discussion about "concerns that the Administration would disregard rulings of federal courts, leading to a constitutional crisis." [FN2] By singling out a sitting President who was (and remains) a party to dozens of active cases, Judge Boasberg attempted to transform a routine housekeeping agenda into a forum to persuade the Chief Justice and other federal judges of his preconceived belief that the Trump Administration would violate court orders.

[FN2] Attachment A at 16.

The complaint is directed to Chief Judge Srinivasan. As Margot points out, it is not clear whether Chief Judge Srinivasan was present at the meeting where Boasberg made these comments:

9/9 And memo indicates that not all members of Judicial Conference attended the breakfast. Bottom line: Judge Boasberg's comments revealed colleagues on D.C. District Court had bias against a litigant. That was and is extremely newsworthy. Judge Srinivasan can take it from here.

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) July 29, 2025

If Srinivasan was present, and has personal knowledge beyond the cursory discussion in the memorandum, recusal might be on the table. In any event, I would hope Judge Srinivasan gives this matter at least as much scrutiny as he gave the ill-fated smear attack against Judge Griffith.