Federal District Judge Samuel B. Kent of Texas had to leave the bench, though not his salary behind.  He will be unable to preside in court because he has been in jail since last Monday, according to Ashley Southall of The New York Times: "serving 33 months in prison for lying to a judicial panel about his sexual assault of two female employees."  The NYT editorialized a week ago that he did not deserve his salary, but needed to be impeached and so he was.  If the U.S. Senate trial of Judge Kent finds him guilty of the House's recent impeachment charges, he will lose his $169,300 salary also.  Federal judges are appointed for life.  Judge Kent refused to resign before going to jail, claiming disability for bipolar disorder and depression, as well as alcoholism.  The judge will be "serving his sentence in a Massachusetts prison that specializes in alcohol and drug rehabilitation," Southall reveals. The House of Representatives, Southall reported,

approved four impeachment articles to remove Samuel B. Kent from the federal district court in Galveston, Tex.: two articles of sexual misconduct, one article of lying during a judicial inquiry, and one article of making material and false statements to federal investigators.

It was quite a journey  for him. As is so often the case it, was not the original offenses that put him away, but the lying about it.  The judge is a sexual offender.  He plead guilty "for lying to an investigative committee of judges about whether he had sexually harassed his secretary. . . In return, the government agreed to drop five charges that he had repeatedly groped his secretary and his case manager," the New York Times reported back in May.  The investigative panel, who did not get the full story,  originally suspended Kent without pay for 4 months, reprimanded him and did not release the details of the abuse.  But then came the indictment and several months later, the guilty plea of lying about it to the original judicial panel.

I was curious to see how he descended so far. In addition to the current impeachment stories, a New York Times search turned up an August 1993 story that I remembered, though I had not made the Judge Kent connection.  Judge Kent, who is from Corpus Christi, Texas,  was appointed in 1991 by George H.W. Bush.  The story concerned a lawsuit brought by Northwest and Continental Airlines against American Airlines for predatory pricing.  American was based at the time in the DFW Metroplex where I live.  Judge Sam Kent presided, famed lawyer David Bois was one of the plaintiffs' attorneys, and Robert Crandall was the colorful head of American Airlines. They clashed and Crandall won, as the jury, following Judge Kent's instructions, turned in a quick verdict for the defendant American Airlines.  To quote:

After an intense four-week trial, jurors decided in less than four hours today that American Airlines did not try to drive weaker competitors out of business with "predatory" prices during the air fare war last summer.

Continental decided not to appeal the verdict, according to a follow-up NYT story.

"I think the fact that the jury came in so quickly and rejected their accusations out of hand probably has had some effect in their thinking," said Andrew B. Steinberg, American Airlines' senior attorney, referring to Continental's decision not to appeal. "It was a clear vindication for American."

Mr. Jamail and David Boies, Continental's lead lawyer, said after the verdict that the only avenues they saw for appeal were Judge Samuel B. Kent's instructions to the jury, which they thought were too specific, and certain rulings on evidence.

. . . Mr. Steinberg also said American Airlines plans early next week to send a bill of its court costs to Judge Kent. He said the costs range from $200,000 to $500,000, which American Airlines wants to recover since it did not bring the suit.

Judge Kent, who said Tuesday he was not inclined to reimburse the costs, told American Airlines lawyers he would take the request under advisement and make a decision next week.

I think of the contrasts in Judge Kent's power and position between 1993 and 2009.  In 1993 Kent presided over a big corporate trial that garnered national coverage , just two years after he came to the federal bench.  After the trial was over he would have been the sole decider as to whether American Airlines would get the $200,000 to $500,000 it lost defending itself against its competitors.

Fast forward to last year and this year. Again it was power and position that came into play.  Sexual harrassment of paid employees is very often rooted in the power-over position of a superior over his subordinates.  I am not qualified to say what part Judge Kent's claimed mental illness paid in the episode.  Perhaps he will get whatever treatment he needs.  But he does not need to continue to collect his salary at taxpayer expense.  Let us hope the Senate acts quickly to remedy this outrageous and sordid saga.