New Details on Sexual Harassment by a Federal Judge

Readers might recall our post a couple of months ago on federal judge Samuel Kent (S.D. Tex.) (photo courtesy Houston Chronicle) being reprimanded by the Fifth Circuit, apparently for sexual harassment.  The reprimand order, however, provided that the pertinent facts were "confidential and will not be disclosed."  We lamented that this was

most unfortunate.  If Judge Kent engaged in sexual harassment, the public has the right to know that, and to know whether he has been held to the same Title VII standard that he is charged with applying to litigants appearing in his court . . . .  The public and practicing attorneys alike have every right to know whether federal judges are being held to the same standards as the rest of us.

Now the Houston Chronicle is reporting -- in a story it says it has corroborated with several independent witnesses, the lurid facts:

[Case Manager Cathy] McBroom was summoned to the judge's chambers on Friday, March 23, at about 3 p.m.  Her hands were full of legal papers when the judge – a former high school athlete who is more than 6 inches taller and at least 100 pounds heavier – asked for a hug.  She told him she didn't think that was appropriate, but reluctantly approached.  The judge grabbed Mc-Broom, pulled up her blouse and her bra and put his mouth on her breast.  Then, Kent forced her head down toward his crotch.  As McBroom struggled, Kent kept telling the married mother of three what he wanted to do to her in words too graphic to publish.  The papers fell to the floor.  The pet bulldog Kent kept in his chambers began to bark.  The incident was interrupted by the sound of footsteps from another staff member in the corridor, and the judge loosened his grip.  As she left, the judge said McBroom was a good case manager and then made suggestions about engaging in a sexual act.  McBroom ran out crying.

Kent has been reprimanded by the Fifth Circuit and transferred from Galveston to Houston, presumably so he can be monitored.  But if these allegations are true -- and the Fifth Circuit's reprimand order and Judge Kent's subsequent transfer strongly indicate they are -- then Judge Kent should be impeached and should face criminal charges.  Moreover, I think the Fifth Circuit itself should be investigated and reprimanded for dealing with this sexual harassment incident in precisely the way that federal courts have been telling employers for years NOT to handle sexual harassment claims.

Hat tip: Beth Thornburg. 

rb