On Friday, December 5, 2025, Law360 reported that ethics complaints against three federal judges—U.S. Circuit Judge James Wynn, U.S. District Judge Max Cogburn, and U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley—have been dismissed. The complaints, filed by the conservative legal organization Article III Project, alleged that the judges improperly reversed their decisions to assume senior status following the 2024 presidential election.

Second Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge Debra Ann Livingston dismissed the ethics cases. In her orders, filed in October, Chief Judge Livingston stated that the timing of a judge’s decision to take or reconsider senior status does not inherently imply misconduct.

The controversy surrounding Judge Wynn began when he notified President Joseph Biden of his intention to take senior status in January 2024. Following a retirement celebration in March and President Biden’s nomination of a successor, Judge Wynn reversed his decision in December 2024 after the presidential election and his successor’s failure to pass the Senate.

This reversal drew criticism from figures such as U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell and Senator Thom Tillis, who labeled it a “brazenly political” move. The Article III Project’s complaint characterized Judge Wynn’s action as a “public rebuke of the winner of the presidential election,” and similar complaints were filed against Judges Cogburn and Marbley, who also withdrew their plans for senior status after the 2024 election.

Chief Judge Livingston defended her decision by noting that the Code of Conduct for federal judges does not dictate when or whether a judge must retire. She added that while Canon 5 of the code prohibits judges from engaging in political activity, Judge Wynn’s decision and subsequent reversal did not express any political views.

While Chief Judge Livingston acknowledged that reversing a senior status decision is “unusual and unfortunate,” she emphasized that retirement remains a personal decision for judges. She cautioned that scrutinizing the timing of such decisions could undermine the independent judgment of judges who possess life tenure.

 

 

Source: Law360