WASHINGTON, DC: The oldest US federal judge, Judge Pauline Newman, 96, has retaliated against a panel of peers who had refused to allow her to hear more cases due to her lack of "mental fitness." She is still in office, as of September 21, 2023.

President Ronald Reagan elevated Newman to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 1984, per ABC News.

The seasoned judge has now been placed on administrative leave by her peers on the Federal Circuit's Judicial Council due to claimed physical weakness and failure to participate in an examination into "reasonable concerns" over her mental fitness.

The 96-year-old Judge of Washington is fighting to demonstrate that she is mentally capable of doing her tasks after being denied the right to hear cases for a year while undergoing a cognitive evaluation.

According to the Associated Press, the judge claims that she is both mentally and physically capable of carrying out her duties and has accused her coworkers of trying to remove her by using her advanced age as a whip.

The newest development in the ongoing controversy regarding Judge Newman's eligibility to continue serving as an active judge—a position she has held for nearly 40 years—is the order from the Judicial Council of the Federal Circuit US Court of Appeals in Washington, DC.

Complaint refers to Judge Pauline Newman's backlog of cases

Newman's prolonged stint on the appeals court took a turn when Chief Judge Kimberly Moore issued an order in March identifying a judicial complaint against her.

The document indicated that Newman's workload had been lowered and referred to a heart attack she experienced in June 2021 and a health episode when she collapsed in May 2022.

It also referred to material from judges and court personnel expressing worries that Newman was in charge of a backlog of cases and that she had an "impairment of cognitive abilities" that prevented her from doing her duties well.

The committee's investigation led to a May order requiring Newman to go through two medical tests, one of which would be a comprehensive neuro-physical assessment comprising nearly six hours of cognitive testing.

The Judicial Council's order stated that if she doesn't cooperate after a year, the suspension may be extended or revoked.

However, Newman resisted the demands and ultimately declined to cooperate. In response, the Judicial Council determined that the judge's refusal constituted malpractice.

How did Judge Newman respond to the one-year suspension?

Following her suspension, Newman sued her fellow judges in federal court, claiming that "I never had a heart attack, never fainted, wasn't hospitalized as Judge Moore said, and apparently told all the judges on my court that I was disabled, not able to move around and not able to think straight."

Her lawyers contend that the suspension disregarded evidence of her competence, including a neurologist's assessment of the judge and a declaration from the doctor.

Newman stated in an interview with the New Civil Liberties Alliance that she "should not succumb or set a pattern of judicial colleagues be able to bully, intimidate and force out a colleague they don't like, who writes dissents, so I refused," per Daily Mail.

According to court records, the senior judge assured the group that she was both mentally and physically capable of doing her duties and that she had received independent assessments from two doctors who shared the same opinion.

According to Newman's neurologist, her cognitive function is "sufficient to continue her participation in her court’s proceedings."