I, do solemnly swear…

§ 453. Oaths of justices and judges

Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation be- fore performing the duties of this office: ‘‘I, lll lll, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to per- sons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as lll under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.’’

Judicial Conduct & Disability

Codes of Conduct and related sources of authority provide standards of behavior for judges and others in the federal court family. The Judicial Conduct and Disability Act allows complaints alleging that a federal judge has engaged in “conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts” or has become, by reason of a temporary or permanent condition, “unable to discharge the duties” of the judicial office.

Congress has created a procedure that permits any person to file a complaint in the courts about the behavior of federal judges—but not about the decisions federal judges make in deciding cases. Below is a link to the rules that explain what may be complained about, who may be complained about, where to file a complaint, and how the complaint will be processed. There is also a link to the form you may use.

Judicial Conduct & Disability

“It feels like … there are two instances where she’s over-reading what the ex-president is asking for,” said anchor Nicolle Wallace. “She seemed to recognize the first time around more privileges than he asserted. The second, he’s not claiming the material isn’t classified. He didn’t make that claim. He just said, I could have declassified them — he didn’t say he did. Where is she finding, and how are we to interpret her judicial philosophy or her approach to this case if she’s reading more than he’s asserting?”

“So I think she gave up what she really was getting at here at the end of her opinion when she said, you know what, the fact that he is the former president, his prior position does make a difference,” said Weissman. “And I think what she is doing is according him more than any of us would ever get in court. I think that was the most outrageous statement. It is a violation of a judge’s oath of office to treat every individual the same. The fact that he is the former president doesn’t mean he get treated worse, but it does not mean, as she did, that he’s treated better.”

Raw Story