Federal Appeals Judge, 98, Appeals Suspension to Supreme Court

Judge Pauline Newman’s medical expert says she’s a ‘Super-Ager,’ who is as active and healthy as someone 20 years younger or more.

Judge Pauline Newman, who is on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, poses in her office in Washington on May 3, 2023. Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post via AP

The oldest active federal judge in the United States asked the U.S. Supreme Court on March 12 to take up her challenge to her ongoing suspension from an appeals court in the nation’s capital.

Judge Pauline Newman, 98, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, filed a petition with the nation’s highest court, arguing that the Federal Circuit unconstitutionally forced her out of her position after an investigation found her alleged cognitive deterioration rendered her unfit for the job.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which is not to be mistaken for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, is a specialized court that has exclusive jurisdiction, or authority, to hear cases involving patents, trademarks, international trade, government contracts, and federal personnel and employment issues.

Newman, who was appointed in 1984 by President Ronald Reagan, is an authority on patent law and a high-profile author of dissenting court opinions.

The lead respondent in the petition is Chief Federal Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore.

Moore signed an order in 2023 saying that a three-judge committee consisting of herself and two others concluded there was “a reasonable basis to conclude she might suffer a disability that interferes with her ability to perform the responsibilities of her office.” Newman failed to undergo medical testing after an expert recommended it, the order said.

Newman also declined to accept service of orders, saying she “was not interested in receiving any documents regarding this matter,” and directed the mailroom at her residence not to accept the orders, the order said.

Later the same year, a council of judges barred Newman from hearing new cases for one year or until she undergoes court-ordered medical examinations.

“We are acutely aware that this is not a fitting capstone to Judge Newman’s exemplary and storied career,” the council said at the time, adding it had no choice because she was “no longer capable of performing the duties of her judicial office.”

In the petition, Newman’s attorneys say the judge remains intellectually and physically robust.

They cite Dr. Aaron G. Filler of the Institute for Nerve Medicine in San Diego, who produced a report in 2024 saying that the then 97-year-old Newman “appears generally healthy and active as if 20 or more years younger than her stated age.”

Newman “engages normally and fluidly in interaction and conversation without any apparent diminishment that might be associated with age in the 10th decade as to other individuals,” Filler said.

The physician said Newman was a “Super-Ager,” meaning she “does not demonstrate effects of age on cognition or demeanor comparable to many others at this age.”

“Based on my experience as an attorney and my expertise as a physician, the content of her speech is entirely appropriate for a serving Court of Appeals Judge,” Filler said.

Newman sued the council in federal district court in Washington. That court dismissed the lawsuit in 2024, finding that the courts have “consistently affirmed the judiciary’s authority to police itself.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed the ruling in 2025.

Newman’s attorneys say in the petition that Moore has “improperly” used the federal Judicial Councils Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 “to perpetually sideline Judge Newman until she gives in to the bullying and retires or takes senior status.”

Senior status is a form of semi-retirement for judges aged 65 or older who have served a minimum number of years of judicial service. Such judges work reduced caseloads but retain their full salary. Taking senior status creates a vacancy on a court, which the sitting president may then fill.

One of Newman’s attorneys, Mark Chenoweth of the New Civil Liberties Alliance, said in a March 12 statement that his client’s case is “the most important battle in America to restore judicial independence.”

“If the Great Dissenter’s colleagues can remove her from the bench in this slipshod fashion, then other federal judges cannot be secure in their lifetime tenure,” he added.

The Epoch Times reached out to the Federal Circuit for comment. No reply was received by publication time.

Reuters contributed to this report.