Judge Quackenbush brought whisky into Restaurante Barcelona, which did not have a liquor license on June 7, 1991.
When owner Maria Solberg told Judge Quackenbush to stop drinking or leave, Judge Quackenbush's response was to threaten Solberg, a legal resident for 20 years, with deportation.
Later Judge Quackenbush paid a $100 fine for consuming liquor in a public place, and then said he was sorry. Citing his past record while ignoring Quackenbush's threats to Solberg, the three justices Wallace, Rymer and Garcia decided, "good enough!"
The three jurist panel cited Quackenbush's "Exemplary" record in the past, while refusing to look at his conduct in the present for awarding him their Grade A pass and ticket for the future.
(To quote Dave Barry: "I am not making this up.")
Below information should be helpful given only a sparse few of Montana media types have acknowledged Cebull's misogyny, while a host of national media types have not. Male reporters have generally only describe Cebull's email as "vulgar."
Really. To quote Dave Barry: "I am not making this up." But wait: there's more!
9th Circuit basics.
The 9th Circuit basic information for filing judicial complaints.
The process begins after a judicial misconduct complaint is filed. Naturally, there are rules for all to follow.
Now for the hiccup, remembering of course, Cebull's initial misogynistic attack was not politically motivated, although the racist part likely was. It's important to remember the American culture is steeped in if not misogyny, total disregard for women. This fact was well demonstrated most recently by the current Republican party - as much as Joe Biden demonstrated this fact, decades ago.
The Problem at the 9th Circuit
Now it gets political.
The problem with the 9th Circuit is its Chief Judge, Alex Kozinski, who has weathered his own Internet related issue, after posting sexually explicit stuff himself...which he also "passed on to friends."
Seems the first question to be answered by the 9th Circuit is whether anyone on the 9th Circuit was also on Cebull's email list.
Although Kozinski is liberal in ways that defy his Republican donations, it is worrisome when it comes to the first issue: misogyny.
That Kozinski is Republican is not worrisome when it comes to Kozinski and the court addressing the secondary issue of racism.
Cebull's racism being just too easy a call to make.
However, one aspect of the investigation seems fairly obvious. Although Chief Judge Cebull asked for a review of this matter, what's clear is it wasn't Cebull's idea.
This seems self-evident given Judge Cebull's earlier, "I apologize to anybody I offended" comment.
Clearly, any man who couldn't - try as a he might, think whom it might have offended, (Although "Mom" was in the Subject Line...and the Mom addressed her son as "Barack")
anyone who couldn't or simply refused to recognize the harm, is simply not credible as an individual who would think to offer his actions for review.
So the question remains - who suggested the morally and politically correct request for review of conduct. (Hint: Do not expect Montana reporters to investigate.)