28 U.S.C. § 357

Review of orders and actions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Review of Action of Judicial Council.—A complainant or judge aggrieved by an action of the judicial council under section 354 may petition the Judicial Conference of the United States for review thereof.(b)Action of Judicial Conference.—The Judicial Conference, or the standing committee established under section 331, may grant a petition filed by a complainant or judge under subsection (a).(c)No Judicial Review.—Except as expressly provided in this section and section 352(c), all orders and determinations, including denials of petitions for review, shall be final and conclusive and shall not be judicially reviewable on appeal or otherwise.(Added Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title I, § 11042(a), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1853.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2006–2026 · leading case: Danos v. Jones, 652 F.3d 577 (5th Cir. 2011).
Danos v. Jones, 652 F.3d 577 (5th Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “See 28 U.S.C. § 357 (a). Yet neither the judicial tenure protections of Article III nor 28 U.”
In Re Opinion of Jud. Conf. Comm. to Review Circuit Council Conduct & Disability Orders, 449 F.3d 106 (Fed. Cir. 2006). · cites it 3× “Facts and Procedural Background The Judicial Conference of the United States has delegated to the Committee to Review Circuit Council Conduct and Disability Orders the responsibility to consider petitions addressed to the Judicial Conference for review of circuit council actions…”
In Re Jud. Conduct & Disability, 517 F.3d 558 (U.S.J.C. 2008). “The Committee's review is based on the delegation to it by the Judicial Conference of the United States of the responsibility to consider petitions addressed to the Judicial Conference for review of circuit council actions under 28 U.S.C. § 357 (a). Jurisdictional Statement of…”
In Re Comm. on Jud. Conduct, 517 F.3d 563 (U.S.J.C. 2008). “The Committee's review is based on the delegation to it by the Judicial Conference of the United States of the responsibility to consider petitions addressed to the Judicial Conference for review of circuit council actions under 28 U.S.C. § 357 (a). Jurisdictional Statement of…”
Danos v. Jones, 721 F. Supp. 2d 491 (E.D. La. 2010). “Having concluded that Danos has failed to establish the ultra vires exception to sovereign immunity, the court need not address the Defendants’ argument that Danos’ statutory claim is foreclosed by 28 U.S.C. § 357 . 7 .Having concluded that the ultra vires exception does not…”
In re Complaint of Jud. Misconduct, 751 F.3d 611 (2014). “The Committee reviews these petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 357 (a) and JCD Rules 21(a) and 21(b)(1)(A).”
In Re Complaint of Jud. Misconduct, 575 F.3d 279 (3rd Cir. 2009). “§ 354 and is conclusive and not subject to further review by the Judicial Council and is not judicially reviewable on appeal or otherwise except as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 357 (a). In accordance with 28 U.”
In Re Complaint of Jud. Misconduct, 591 F.3d 638 (U.S.J.C. 2009). “The Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability acts on behalf of the Judicial Conference of the United States pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 357 in reviewing petitions that appeal misconduct complaint determinations by a Judicial Council.”
In re Opinion of Jud. Conf. Comm., 342 F.3d 106 (U.S.J.C. 2006). · cites it 3× “Facts and Procedural Background The Judicial Conference of the United States has delegated to the Committee to Review Circuit Council Conduct and Disability Orders the responsibility to consider petitions addressed to the Judicial Conference for review of circuit council actions…”
In Re Complaint of Jud. Misconduct, 640 F.3d 354 (U.S.J.C. 2010). “See 28 U.S.C. § 357 (a) and Rule 21(b)(1)(A), Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings, 248 F.”
Newman v. Moore (D.D.C. 2024). · cites it 7× “28 U.S.C. § 357 (c) Precludes Judge Newman’s As-Applied Challenges Because Judge Newman’s challenges to the Judicial Council’s § 332(d) orders are moot, the Court now turns to the second track along which the Judicial Council proceeded: the JC&D Act.”
Pauline Newman v. Kimberly Moore (D.C. Cir. 2025). · cites it 2× “” 28 U.S.C. § 357 (c). By its plain text, that provision appears to explicitly preclude judicial review of all challenges to covered orders.”
— 28 U.S.C. § 357(c) — 1 case
Newman v. Moore (D.D.C. 2024). “28 U.S.C. § 357 (c) Precludes Judge Newman’s As-Applied Challenges Because Judge Newman’s challenges to the Judicial Council’s § 332(d) orders are moot, the Court now turns to the second track along which the Judicial Council proceeded: the JC&D Act.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.