WITH LOVE, FROM FISA

Aug 01, 2024

The American Bar Association includes “political affiliation” as one of the grounds upon which a judge cannot manifest bias or prejudice in the performance of judicial duties (see ABA Rule 2.3). What does this mean for D.C. Judge Mehta, who has been called President Trump’s “nemesis” by the press?

Judge Amit Mehta, a native of India, is employed by both the federal government and the D.C. government in his role on two different benches. His term on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court expires in 2028. D.C. Judge Mehta’s wife, a D.C. criminal defense attorney, writes for The Huffington Post where she described President Joe Biden as “impossible not to like” ( The Pope and Me and What Might Have Been | HuffPost Communities ).

The Mehtas have friends at various levels of D.C. government. Judge Mehta’s confirmation to the D.C. bench was spurred by D.C. Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, who introduced a bill to create a National Commission on the U.S. Capitol attack in January 2021. Two years earlier, Mehta thanked Norton “for recommending me to the president (President Biden)”. In 2019, Mehta told Congresswoman Norton that it was because of her “wisdom and courage to set up a nominating commission” that his D.C. judgeship was “within reach”. Judge Mehta’s close friend Congresswoman Norton has said publicly that the events on January 6^th were an “insurrection” even though no treason or insurrection charges have been filed. (Norton Introduces Bill to Create National Commission on U.S. Capitol Attack | Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (house.gov) ;

A case in April 2022 before D.C. Judge Amit Mehta involving policeman Thomas Webster is particularly notable. Judge Mehta ruled to suppress a witness' video evidence of the J6 defendant Webster engaging in self-defense after another individual pushed a woman to the ground. By doing so, Judge Mehta used his position as judge to assist the federal government's position. This may violate District of Columbia code 1-1162.23 .

Judge Mehta, an employee of a federal court the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, used his position as a D.C. judge through decision and disapproval of evidence admission to influence the outcome of a particular matter (self-defense or battery) in a manner that is likely to have an impact (a guilty verdict) on his own financial interests (federal government benefit) or the financial interests of those closely connected to Judge Mehta (his fellow coworkers, the federal prosecutors). See: Part C. Conflicts of Interest. | D.C. Law Library (dccouncil.us)

In addition to the D.C. bench, Judge Mehta also sits on a federal court: the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court or the “FISA court” (Current Membership - Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court | Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court | United States (uscourts.gov)). Judge Mehta, in his role on this court, is able to view documents submitted by the FBI to targets of their surveillance. The FBI findings under the FISA court’s jurisdiction include the Trump 2016 presidential campaign and members of the Oath Keepers. Most FISA briefs available to the public are heavily redacted. If Judge Mehta is viewing Oath Keeper confidential information at the FISA court before ruling on Oath Keepers on the capitol, can he be doing so in a non-biased way? The review of evidence at the FISA court level by Judge Mehta that may not be admitted at the D.C. court level by Judge Mehta makes it hard to tell.

Judge Mehta has never recused himself from the Oath Keeper trials despite sitting on the FISA court. The FISA court has received multiple non-partisan calls for review. Representative Devin Nunes called for its disbandment in 2019, citing its multiple procedural and ethical errors to the U.S. Department of Justice. ( https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/nunes-calls-for-ending-fisa-court-theyve-left-congress-no-choice )

The cultural influences on the Mehtas are listed in one 2015 article by his wife Caroline Judge Mehta: Jon Stewart (who told Fox News President Trump was “the greatest agent of chaos”), and the Obama kids. In the same article, Mehta writes “I can't explain how the same polity that celebrated the extension of full marriage rights to all co-exists with the Westboro Baptist Church, or Kim Davis and her jumpers. I certainly can't explain Donald Trump.” ( A Farewell to Our Unlikely Au Pair | HuffPost Life ) This seems like a really partisan environment for a judge ruling on Trump related issues.

Judge Amit Mehta was called President Trump’s “nemesis”^[15] by India Abroad in 2019, and India Abroad operates on multiple continents. President Trump’s “nemesis” is a title that multiple other outlets ran with for Judge Mehta.^[16] Judge Mehta made no public attempt to disparage this nickname, while seated on a court that oversees all Americans, including Trump voters. Judge Mehta presided over three civil lawsuits against President Trump. According to 28 U.S. Code § 144, U.S. judges should not exhibit bias or prejudice.

D.C. Judge Mehta's conduct also raises questions under the D.C. Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 2.3(b):

2.3(B) A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, or engage in harassment, including but not limited to bias, prejudice, or harassment based upon race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation, and shall not permit court staff, court officials, or others subject to the judge’s direction and control to do so.

Judge Mehta has, by statements given to the press and his conduct, permitted himself to be referred to as Trump's "nemesis" by India Abroad, who printed some of his statements in an interview in 2019. This nickname was printed by various other global publications. This public nickname exposes his bias and prejudice on the basis of political affiliation. Judge Mehta also oversees January 6th defendant cases which involve footage and testimony regarding Trump support and a Trump rally. By permitting various newspapers to refer to Mehta as "Trump's nemesis", the judge is engaging in partisan rhetoric that harms his stature on the D.C. bench. The Code of Judicial Conduct states "On February 15, 2018, the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration approved this republication of the 2012 Code of Judicial Conduct for the District of Columbia Courts."