On Friday, June 5, 2026, Bloomberg Law reported that US District Judge Eleanor Ross, based in Atlanta, is facing a new motion for recusal. This motion stems from allegations that she did not adequately supervise her law clerks in handling civil cases. The legal team representing a former UPS employee filed this motion on June 3, referencing a recently publicized judicial misconduct order.

The core of the recusal request centers on the assertion that an “objectively reasonable observer” could question whether the plaintiff received the level of independent judicial scrutiny typically expected of an Article III judge. This concern is heightened when considering the Judicial Council’s findings regarding the assignment, review, and decision-making process for civil motions.

Vernon Strickland, one of the lawyers involved, stated that the Judicial Council’s findings provide “factual context” for actions taken in the litigation that seemed inconsistent with basic federal civil-procedure principles.

While the attorneys are not seeking to overturn any prior rulings, they highlighted that Judge Ross referred to one of their allegations as a “new theory” in her grant of summary judgment, despite it being included in their initial complaint. This, they argue, further supports the grounds for questioning the impartiality of the judicial review.

The Eleventh Circuit Judicial Council’s order, which did not name the judge, was reported by Bloomberg Law to be about Judge Ross. A special committee’s findings indicated a “longstanding practice” by Ross to handle criminal cases without law clerk assistance, leaving clerks to manage civil matters largely on their own.

The order noted that clerks were often unsure if the judge reviewed pleadings or drafted civil orders, with former and current staff suggesting that some civil orders might have been issued without Ross’s direct review. Ross herself acknowledged to judicial investigators that she may have relied too heavily on law clerks in the past.

Although the Judicial Council did not issue a misconduct finding on these specific claims, the special committee expressed concern over the judge’s limited engagement in civil cases. The council did, however, find that Ross engaged in misconduct by having sex in her chambers with a police officer, improperly attending a political event, and lying to judicial investigators.

In addition to the recusal motion, Representative Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) announced that he is drafting articles of impeachment against Judge Ross.

Furthermore, the Justice Department has filed its own recusal request in a lawsuit concerning Georgia voter rolls. This request is based on Judge Ross’s attendance at an election party for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, who brought charges against former President Donald Trump.

The Justice Department urged a ruling on its request by June 12, citing the need for “expedited proceedings” before the fall midterm elections. However, outside parties seeking to intervene in the case, represented by Elias Law Group LLP and Krevolin & Horst, LLC, argued that a swift ruling is not necessary, given the Justice Department’s own “lackadaisical” approach to the case.

 

 

Source: Bloomberg Law