It was billed as a “fireside chat” — a short, soft Q&A session to open the 8th Annual Bench Bar Conference for the Northern District of Texas Friday morning.
The chat between NDTX District Clerk Karen Mitchell and NDTX Chief Judge David Godbey began with descriptions of the district and the normal problems of budget and policy, including AI.
Godbey acknowledged Mitchell as the longest-serving district clerk in the federal system with a playful question: “With electronic filing now, what exactly do you do?”
“It may come as a surprise to you, your honor,” replied Mitchell in mock retort, “but even when they file electronically, lawyers make mistakes.”
On the use of artificial intelligence, Judge Godbey was sanguine. Although federal rules require lawyers to disclose its use, Godbey wasn’t sure how the failure to disclose would be enforced, but to him it makes no difference.
“I personally don’t think it changes much,” said Godbey. “A brief has to be signed by a human. And if it’s your name on the brief and something is wrong, then it’s literally your name on the line.”
But when Mitchell asked the judge to describe his concerns on the bench, Godbey took an imaginary poker to the fictitious fire at his side.
“It used to be the worst thing that would happen to me was that I’d get reversed. I didn’t much like it, but I could deal with it. They can reverse me, but they can’t make me read the opinion,” he noted. “I’d just look at the end at the mandate part and see what I’ve gotta do.”
“But now, if I do something that people disagree with elected politicians will call for me to be impeached. Non-elected, active citizens will send me death threats and publish my personal information on the internet and encourage like-minded people to try to kill me. That’s a different ballgame.”
He didn’t stop there.
“I’m not necessarily sure that I signed up to get killed in this job. It’s a good job, and I like it and I’m not going to quit. But really, when I came on the bench the likelihood of getting killed was pretty small. And now it’s not; it’s just not,” he continued — to a suddenly quiet room.
“That’s a problem: insecurity, security, personal security — and the likely larger influence on judicial independence. I’m supposed to do my job with concerns like that. That’s why I have life tenure. But when there are threats like that, the life tenure thing doesn’t quite seem as secure as it used to.”
“When politicians go on the airwaves and say, ‘Renegade judge does such-and-such’ where does that put judicial independence?”