A top federal court official has rejected a Justice Department complaint that accused U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes of engaging in “hostile and egregious” conduct during hearings on President Donald Trump’s ban on transgender service members.
The decision leaves unresolved broader questions about how judges’ behavior in court should be addressed and what steps the Justice Department should take when it believes a judge is biased.
Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit concluded that, if the department believed Reyes’ conduct raised serious doubts about her impartiality, it should have asked for her recusal in the underlying case rather than filing a separate misconduct complaint.
Srinivasan noted that “the standards for resolving the matter are well established” when concerns about a judge’s impartiality are raised through a recusal motion. He did not, however, weigh in on whether the allegations themselves had merit.
The complaint, submitted by then–Attorney General’s chief of staff Chad Mizelle, asserted that Reyes improperly questioned a government lawyer about his religious beliefs and used a pointed rhetorical exercise referencing graduates of the University of Virginia.
Mizelle argued that the episode “compromised the dignity of the proceedings and demonstrated potential bias.”
Reyes, who was nominated to the bench by President Joe Biden, had previously halted enforcement of the transgender troop ban while the case is on appeal. The dismissal of the misconduct complaint still leaves open whether the Justice Department or other parties in the case will seek her recusal, pursue an appeal, or continue to raise the underlying allegations as litigation over the policy moves forward.
