A judicial council investigating U.S. Circuit Judge Pauline Newman, the nation’s oldest sitting federal judge at 97, has identified significant errors in medical reports she submitted to defend her ability to remain on the bench. The council had suspended Newman last year due to concerns about her mental health, citing unexplained delays and confusion in her work.
Newman, appointed in 1984, refused to undergo independent neurological testing or provide medical records, leading to her temporary suspension. In December, she requested the release of documents related to the case, arguing they contained no information about other witnesses or complainants. Among these documents were reports from medical specialists she consulted to prove her competence.
One such report, from California neurosurgeon Aaron Filler, described Newman as “fully capable” and a “super-ager,” claiming brain scans showed no major signs of cognitive decline. However, the Judicial Council of the Federal Circuit found major flaws in Filler’s evaluation and other reports submitted in her defense.
A primary issue was Filler’s use of a “CT Perfusion scan” in place of standard neuropsychological testing. Dr. James M. Noble, a neurology professor at Columbia University Irving Medical Center, explained that while this scan shows blood flow to the brain, it cannot determine whether the brain is functioning properly. He emphasized that this method is not used in evaluating cognitive aging disorders, including mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia.
Clinical and forensic neuropsychologist Jonathan DeRight supported this assessment, stating that there are established methods for diagnosing cognitive impairment, and a Perfusion CT scan is not among them. He criticized the approach as unscientific and unreliable.
The council also found that Filler had mislabeled brain scan images, identifying certain regions as the hippocampus—an area crucial for memory and cognitive function—when, according to Noble, the hippocampus is located several centimeters away and is not even visible in the image Filler provided.
DeRight further criticized the report for failing to account for all possible causes of cognitive impairment, calling it subjective, non-standard, and not in line with accepted medical guidelines for diagnosing cognitive decline.
Newman’s attorney, Greg Dolin, dismissed the council’s conclusions, arguing that the medical consultants it relied upon used outdated methods and ignored modern scientific advancements. He stated that they would formally respond to the order, calling the council’s actions improper and unethical.
Following her suspension, Newman filed a lawsuit against the Federal Circuit judges involved in the decision. The lawsuit was supported by a legal organization advocating against administrative overreach. However, a district court dismissed most of her claims in early 2024, and by July, the entire case was thrown out. The judge in that ruling did not assess the allegations against Newman but rejected her legal arguments against the Judicial Conduct & Disability Act. She appealed the decision in July.
In January, the Judicial Council of the Federal Circuit filed a response opposing Newman’s appeal, arguing that her claim of an unconstitutional suspension is unfounded and that her request for a transfer to another circuit’s judicial council lacks merit.
