IMPORTANT UPDATED AT BOTTOM
The movement that swept the nation taking aim at holding powerful men accountable for sexual harassment, misconduct, and assault named a prominent jurist as a serial harasser. No justice not Kavanaugh.
One of the former Kozinski clerks, Heidi Bond, who was his clerk between 2006 and 2007 has gone on the record with allegations that on multiple occasions the judge summoned her alone to his chambers in order to show her pornography which was unrelated to any case before the judge. He then asked if the images turned her on. Bond recounts at least three different instances of being shown porn by her boss and says the experiences were shocking. She has also written an extremely disturbing first-person account of her experiences of clerking for Judge Kozinski where she also details Kozinski isolating her from her co-clerks to discuss his sexual history
The Fallout continues today as Harvard Law students seek to stop future attacks as this updated information builds on the previous allegations:
In August, a group of Harvard and Yale law students sent a memo to the Judicial Conference of the United States — the policy-making body for U.S. federal courts — urging the conference to a “adopt reforms regarding the role and responsibilities of law schools in reporting and responding to complaints of harassment and other abusive workplace practices.”
That memo came in response to recommendations put forward by the Federal Judiciary Workplace Conduct Working Group, a committee formed following reports that former Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski sexually harassed several of his clerks and employees. Kozinski, who stepped down in the wake of the allegations, has said he never intended to make his clerks uncomfortable.
In October, members of the Pipeline Parity Project penned an open letter to the Judicial Conference calling for three policies they believed were missing from the working group’s recommendations: a climate survey, an informal reporting structure, and a centralized office to receive reports. Hundreds of students from law schools across the country signed the letter. Pipeline Parity Project members also sent recommendations to the Judicial Conference earlier this month.
Second-year Law student and Pipeline Parity Project member Emma R. Janger said in an interview Thursday that the group set out at its founding to organize in response to Kozinski’s alleged sexual harassment of clerks.
“One of the absolutely founding sort of impetuses for Pipeline was the allegations that came out against Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski,” Janger said. “One of the reasons Pipeline was founded was in response . . . the fact that as much as the allegations sent shockwaves, by many important players in the legal profession, Kozinski’s harassment was viewed as an open secret.”
Prominent appeals court Judge Alex Kozinski accused of sexual misconduct
Judge Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, pictured in 2003. Six women — all former clerks or externs in the 9th Circuit — alleged to The Washington Post in recent weeks that Kozinski, now 67, subjected them to a range of inappropriate sexual conduct or comments.
A former clerk for Judge Alex Kozinski said the powerful and well-known jurist, who for many years served as chief judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, called her into his office several times and pulled up pornography on his computer, asking if she thought it was photoshopped or if it aroused her sexually.
Heidi Bond, who clerked for Kozinski from 2006 to 2007, said the porn was not related to any case. One set of images she remembered was of college-age students at a party where “some people were inexplicably naked while everyone else was clothed.” Another was a sort of digital flip book that allowed users to mix and match heads, torsos and legs to create an image of a naked woman.
Bond is one of six women — all former clerks or more junior staffers known as externs in the 9th Circuit — who alleged to The Washington Post in recent weeks that Kozinski, now 67 and still serving as a judge on the court, subjected them to a range of inappropriate sexual conduct or comments. She is one of two former clerks who said Kozinski asked them to view porn in his chambers.
In a statement, Kozinski said: “I have been a judge for 35 years and during that time have had over 500 employees in my chambers. I treat all of my employees as family and work very closely with most of them. I would never intentionally do anything to offend anyone and it is regrettable that a handful have been offended by something I may have said or done.”
In March of 2017, after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s temporary block of Trump’s original executive order instituting a travel ban on people who came from several countries with predominantly Muslim populations, Kozinski issued a dissent of the decision and criticized three of his colleagues who made it. In his dissent, Kozinski wrote in part: “the panel’s reasoning rests solely on Due Process. But the vast majority of foreigners covered by the executive order have no Due Process rights. Nevertheless, the district court enjoined the order’s travel provisions in their entirety, even as applied to the millions of aliens who have no constitutional rights whatsoever because they have never set foot on American soil.”
Now that’s sick, but then again, what else can we expect from a judge from the infamous 9th circuit court. Hopefully the Harvard law students can finally have their voices heard and make real change in America’s judicial system to stop sexal harassment
Multiple women say appeals court judge Alex Kozinski asked them to watch porn or subjected them to sexually inappropriate comments https://t.co/v7VbysRsxG
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) December 8, 2017
FACTCHECK.ORG noted that our headline stated Judge Alex Kozinski “struck down” President Donald Trump’s original travel ban, however, Factcheck stated he actually opposed its suspension. Our headline was incorrect. We changed the headline to read “9th Circuit Judge Who Dissented Block Of Trump’s Muslim Travel Ban.” We also added to the story: “In March of 2017, after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s temporary block of Trump’s original executive order instituting a travel ban on people who came from several countries with predominantly Muslim populations, Kozinski issued a dissent of the decision and criticized three of his colleagues who made it. In his dissent, Kozinski wrote in part: “the panel’s reasoning rests solely on Due Process. But the vast majority of foreigners covered by the executive order have no Due Process rights. Nevertheless, the district court enjoined the order’s travel provisions in their entirety, even as applied to the millions of aliens who have no constitutional rights whatsoever because they have never set foot on American soil.””
FactCheck goes on to state that “In reality, Kozinski was widely known to be a conservative”. However, this in an opinion not a fact. Just as our article called him a liberal it’s a matter of opinion based on case rulings. Just because a conservative president nominated him, it doesn’t mean he’s of that political affiliation. We removed all mention of Kozinksi being a “liberal” & having “far left agenda leanings” (explanation of “far left agenda leanings” reference is below),” and we added to the story “Kozinski was nominated to the court by former President Ronald Reagan. Slate Magazine referred to Kozinski as a “Republican-appointed libertarian” in a 2016 article.”
FactCheck noted that our article stated: “Now that’s sick, but then again, what else can we expect from a judge from the infamous 9th circuit court who is known for its radical far left agenda leanings.” The writer incorrectly personified the 9th Circuit by using the word “who.” The word that should have been used is “which” so there would be no confusion between Kozinski & the court being referred to as having “far left agenda leanings.” Our article incorrectly identified Kozinski as having “far left agenda leanings” through poor word choice. We removed the portion that stated: “who is known for its radical far left agenda leanings. No wonder the 9th circuit wants Muslims Refugees in this nation, they act the same way their judges act.”