Nicole Allan/ Melissa Bailey File Photos
After raising questions about a federal judge’s impartiality on the “New Haven 20” firefighters case, attorney Karen Torre formally asked the judge to step down.
The attorney for the New Haven 20 filed a motion on Tuesday seeking to have Judge Janet Bond Arterton recuse herself from the case of Ricci v. DeStefano. The judge’s behaviors create the appearance of a lack of detachment from the case, Torre (right photo) argues.
Arterton (left photo) has stated that she sees no grounds for her recusal.
Tuesday’s filing comes a month after two contentious status conferences, in which Torre grilled Arterton about potential conflicts of interest.
The 40-page document, which was filed one day late, details a litany of behaviors and relationships that Torre finds questionable. Many of the allegations were raised in Jan. 20 and 27 conferences with Judge Arterton. But Torre also takes aim at Arterton’s past associations with known feminists and with an academic who allegedly accused the Supreme Court of a commitment to white supremacy.
Read the motion here.
Torre represents a group of mostly white firefighters — dubbed the New Haven 20 — who sued the city in 2004 for failing to certify the results of a 2003 promotions exam. The city threw out the test after no black firefighters scored highly enough to be among the first round of promotions.
Last June, the case landed in front of the Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of the New Haven 20. Fourteen of the 20 were promoted last year. Now the case is back in Arterton’s court, where the question of damages remains to be settled.
Torre’s Tuesday filing comprises a comprehensive 40 pages. She begins at the opening of the Ricci trial, when, she writes, the case was transfered to Arterton without explanation.
Arterton’s initial ruling for the city would have allowed the city to redo the promotions exam “with the admitted aim of awarding a greater number of the limited vacancies to blacks and decreasing the number of whites to be promoted,” Torre writes.
The motion then addresses the fact that Arterton’s former firm represented the Firebirds in the ‘90s. The Firebirds are a local chapter of the International Association of Black Firefighters. Current Firebirds have sought and are seeking to intervene in the Ricci case.
In a Feb. 4 conference in her courtroom, Arterton dismissed the matter of Firebird representation by her former firm. The firm did not represent any of the people now seeking to intervene, and it was too long ago to matter anyway, she argued.
The one Firebird now seeking to intervene on the Ricci case is Michael Briscoe, who is represented by attorney David Rosen. Torre dedicates many pages to Rosen. She suggests that the attorney and the judge may have discussed the Ricci case.
Arterton has stated that she has never discussed the substance of the Ricci case with anyone.
The last part of Torre’s motion is dedicated to Arterton’s “Extrajudicial Public Statements On Issues That Permeate This Case.” It’s here that Torre claims that the judge’s personal statements indicate a lack of detachment from the Ricci case.
Torre writes that although the judge hears cases on a variety of topics, whenever she speaks in public it is “about gender, race, gender/race disparities, and employment litigation.”
For example, Judge Arterton agreed to be the keynote speaker at a Yale Law School conference of “self-described feminists,” Torre writes.
In 2005, the judge addressed a conference of the National Employment Lawyers Association. Torre writes, “In that address, this Court made remarks which, to an objective observer, can fairly be considered to evince the Court’s lack of neutrality respecting so-called ‘reverse discrimination victims,’ a term most understand to mean ‘white guys.’”
Recently, Judge Arterton was a panelist at a University of Connecticut event honoring Professor Charles Lawrence. The professor is “an outspoken and passionate critic of the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Washington v. Davis, 426 U.S. 229 (1976), a case on which the plaintiffs [the New Haven 20] in this case [Ricci] heavily relied,” Torre writes.
Lawrence’s comments at the event “can only be described as a racially offensive and inflammatory rant,” Torre writes. The professor suggested the Supreme Court had a “commitment to white supremacy,” the motion reads.
When Arterton spoke, after Lawrence, she did not distance herself from his comments, Torre writes. “The Court’s participation in this event, and its remarks at this and the other events as above-described give rise to an appearance of partiality respecting issues at the core of this case and the rights of the twenty plaintiffs in this case.”
Torre’s motion concludes with an official request that Arterton recuse herself from the Ricci case.
The judge is expected to rule on the motion.
Past stories on fire department promotions and the Ricci case:
• Judge Swings Back; Ricci Case Stalls
• “Tinney Intervenors” Step Down In Ricci Case
• Ricci Victors Seek Damages
• After 6‑Year Battle, Firefighters Get Badges
• Ricci Case’s “Tinney Intervenors” Try Again
• 10 More Firefighters Promoted
• Judge Blocks Black Firefighters’ Move
• Board Promotes 14 Firefighters
• Judge Orders Firefighter Promotions
• Black Firefighters Seek To Halt Promotions
• Promotions Pitched In Ricci Case
• Ricci’s Back In Court
• After Ricci Ruling, Black Firefighter Sues City
• Ricci Takes The Stand
• In D.C., Two Latino Views On Sotomayor
• Dems Swing Back On Ricci
• ConnectiCOSH Kibosh
• Sotomayor: I Didn’t “Hide” Ricci Case
• Is Ricci Being Smeared?
• Sotomayor Speaks On Ricci
• Ricci Takes Center Stage
• Watley: I’d Have Promoted Ricci
• Firebirds, NAACP: Ricci Won’t Stop Us
• “If You Work Hard You Can Succeed In America”
• Was He The Culprit?
• Supreme Court Overturns City On Ricci
• On Page 25, A Hint
• Minority Firefighters Vow Post-Ricci Unity
• Ricci Ruling Won’t End Quest
• Ricci, Sotomayor Brand DeStefano
• Firefighter Case Reveals Surprise Obama Stand
• Justices Zero In On Race-Based Distinctions
• Rights Groups Back Black Firefighters
• The Supreme Stakes: Title VII’s Future
• Dobbs v. Bolden
• Latino Group Backs White Firefighters
• Black Firefighters: Ricci Case Poses Grave Threat
• NAACP Backs City In Firefighter Case
• Paging Justice Kennedy
• Fire Inspectors Promoted
• Fire Inspector List Approved
• U.S. Supreme Court To Hear Firefighters’ Case
• Fire Promotions Examined in Supreme Court
This reporter writes like a muckraker. ...Torre didn't move to recuse the judge for "consorting with feminists." I know Torre - she is a feminist herself.
She was citing the judges's REMARKS about males and discrimination, and about race and reverse discrimination, and argues this fairly calls into question whether she has an antipathy toward reverse discrimination plaintiffs. The judge's ruling against these "reverse discrimination" victims in the Ricci case was criticized and got overturned. How would you like going back to that judge?
What's McMillan's next headline on the case gonna be? "Torre insists on vegetarian jurist"?