'Did Judge Ho Just Do Something Good?': Trump Appointee Causes Stir on Twitter
The judge's stance against what appeared to be a homophobic legal argument blew up on Twitter Friday.
February 07, 2020 at 05:17 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Texas Lawyer
Judge James Ho was the talk of appellate Twitter Friday afternoon. And observers seemed stunned after the conservative jurist from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit appeared to lash out at homophobic legal arguments.
Ho is an appointee of President Donald Trump with a reputation as a conservative, pro-prosecutor jurist. But his strong stance against the legal argument in question garnered applause on social media, as a footnote in the case appeared to cast the judge in a new light.
"Wait," tweeted Twitter user Sam Rubinstein, whose bio describes him as Jewish and gay. "Did Judge Ho just do something good?"
Raffi Melkonian, a Wright, Close & Barger Houston partner, started the conversation on social media.
"Really remarkable footnote from judge Ho, not joined by the other judges on the panel," Melkonian tweeted.
The thread referred to a footnote in a decision released Friday that pitted the parent of an unnamed student against Mississippi's Hinds County School District and three members of its staff.
The parent in the litigation claimed a school employee violated her son's Fourth Amendment rights by searching his pockets after a teacher caught him selling contraband candy, according to the opinion. She alleged the employee also grabbed her son's genitals.
But the footnote in the appellate ruling showed that Ho found the appeal to be frivolous, and stood alone on the panel in wanting to have the plaintiff's lawyer sanctioned for "conduct unbecoming a member of the bar."
"The appeal is demonstrably frivolous on the face of counsel's briefs. Moreover, those briefs not only contain countless misspellings and grammatical errors—they also appear to appeal to prejudice," the footnote reads.
But what it says next set tongues wagging.
"Counsel's opening brief repeatedly contends that 'Brumfield was touching around in minors [sic] pocket, making minor believe the defendant was gay. Her reply brief then concludes that B.O. 'believed that … Broomfield [sic] was gay, making the touch of the minor's privacy area that more offensive,'" the footnote reads. "That is circular logic: Brumfield searched B.O.'s pockets, so he must be gay—and because he is gay, he shouldn't have searched B.O.'s pockets. And the demonstrable failure of counsel's logic makes one wonder why counsel bothers to bring up sexual orientation at all. It should go without saying that members of the bar are expected to engage in legal argument—not prejudice."
|Click Here to read the court document
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump-Appointed Judge Presides Over NASCAR Antitrust Dispute Under Case Reassignment
3 minute readState Appellate Court Relies on 'Cancellation Rule' for Expert's Conflicting Testimony
'Entitlement to Information Has Its Limits:' Judge Denies Another Discovery Deadline Extension in Trademark Suit
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: The Recorder and Law.com's California Legal Awards 2025
- 2The Week in Data Dec. 13: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
- 3Antitrust Class Actions Against CVS, Other Pharmacy Benefit Managers Are Piling Up
- 4Judge Grinds NY's Cannabis Licensing Regime to a Halt Again
- 5On the Move and After Hours: Barclay Damon; VLJ; Barnes & Thornburg
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250