On Thursday, January 23, 2025, Inewsource reported that San Diego Superior Court Judge Howard Shore announced his retirement following a tumultuous period marked by disciplinary actions regarding his attendance.
His retirement comes just over a year after the California Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP) issued a severe public censure against him. This disciplinary action was prompted by Shore’s repeated absences from work, specifically for missing at least 155 days over the past two years. The commission characterized his failure to attend work, particularly on Fridays, as a “dereliction of duty.” The censure was significant, being the second most severe penalty the CJP can enforce, just one step shy of complete removal from the bench.
Shore had not worked Fridays from May 2021 to November 2022 without obtaining approval from the presiding judge, despite continuing to receive his salary. When confronted about these absences, he initially denied skipping work but later attributed his behavior to family medical issues requiring travel to Los Angeles and his Orthodox Jewish beliefs, which prohibit driving from Friday evenings through Saturday.
In light of the censure, Shore expressed remorse and agreed to the disciplinary measures. However, his situation drew criticism from some defense attorneys. They were particularly frustrated that Shore would not be required to repay the salary he received during his unauthorized absences, which some estimated could total between $82,000 and $146,000. One attorney described the situation as difficult to reconcile with legal definitions of theft.
Shore’s challenges extended beyond attendance issues. Last year, lawyers from the Public Defender’s Office attempted to disqualify him from presiding over cases related to the state Racial Justice Act. This law allows individuals charged with crimes to contest their prosecution based on claims of racial bias. The lawyers cited the censure and made claims regarding Shore’s comments during hearings on Racial Justice Act motions, which they deemed insensitive.
In a notable incident, Judge Cheri Pham of the Orange County Superior Court ruled to disqualify Shore from handling several cases associated with the Racial Justice Act. She indicated that his previous language and comments could imply biases against certain racial or ethnic groups and suggested that he might disregard statistical evidence regarding implicit bias. Judge Pham clarified that her decision was independent of the censure and focused solely on the implications of Shore’s comments.
Following these controversies, Shore was reassigned from criminal cases to presiding over civil law matters. His retirement marks the end of a lengthy tenure that began with his appointment to the bench in 1990. In an email to colleagues, Shore referred to his time on the bench as having served in the “best bench in the state,” although he did not provide specific reasons for his retirement.
Source: Inewsource
