Maryland Commission on Judicial Disabilities Fails Women

Maryland District Court Judge Bruce S. Lamdin, who sits in Baltimore County (where I live), has decided to “retire” rather than face judicial ethics charges stemming from his conduct during an order of protection hearing. Listen to the Lamdin Audio (trigger warning for extreme woman hatred). Read the news links below for details on Lamdin’s egregious behavior.

So, the Maryland Commission on Judicial Disabilities dropped its investigation. Because the woman-hating judge “retired.” So problem “solved.”

Except, no.

Because the Maryland Commission on Judicial Disabilities dropped its investigation,  Lamdin, as a retired judge, can be recalled to help clear dockets in Baltimore County – and be paid to do it. Even though he is a woman-hating judge.

How is this right?

How is this just?

The Maryland Rules provide that the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals may assign any former judge to sit temporarily in any court if the temporary assignment is approved by the administrative judge of the circuit in which the former judge is to be assigned and if the former judge has served in the aggregate at least 2 years as a judge.

There are exceptions to this. A former judge cannot be recalled for temporary assignment if the judge:

  • Was removed or involuntarily retired from judicial office pursuant to the Constitution or laws of Maryland;
  • Voluntarily retired by reason of disability;
  • Had the most recent service as a judge terminated by reason of defeat for election to judicial office or by rejection of confirmation by the Senate;
  • Was censured by the Court of Appeals upon recommendation of the Commission on Judicial Disabilities; or
  • Is engaged in the practice of law.

Because the Commission on Judicial Disabilities has dropped its investigation, the judge can be recalled, at any time.

This is not justice.

This is not right.

Contact the Commission and tell it to REOPEN its investigation and censure Judge Lamdin.

Because justice demands it.

PS – Parris Glendening, a Democrat, appointed Lamdin. Dems, DO BETTER.

Rodricks: Old-school attitudes on the bench catch up to Judge Lamdin

Judge Lamdin to retire, keep pension after groups’ complaint 

Judge Bruce Lamdin interrogates woman seeking restraining order

Embattled judge Lamdin to leave bench 

Baltimore County Judge’s Mouth Gets Him in Trouble

Embattled Baltimore County Judge Bruce Lamdin to retire

Prior Complaint Against Lamdin (he was NOT censured)

Prior News Coverage of Prior Complaint

Editorial: Lamdin earned his ouster

by Daily Record Staff

Published: September 13th, 2012

It was time for Baltimore County Judge Bruce S. Lamdin to go.

For the second time in five years — that we know of — the Maryland District Court judge let loose with intemperate and injudicious remarks in his courtroom.

In the most recent case, he criticized and derided a woman seeking a protective order against her husband last December.

As reflected in court transcripts, Judge Lamdin issued the order, but only after telling the woman that her real concern was for “the almighty dollar” in asking that her husband be barred from their White Marsh home.

In granting the order, the judge said to the woman: “You can hold a piece of paper right up in front of this gentleman, and he can shoot you right through it.”

He was quickly banished to his chambers — not allowed to hear active cases — by Chief District Judge Ben C. Clyburn while the Maryland Commission on Judicial Disabilities investigated the complaint filed by the Women’s Law Center of Maryland, House of Ruth Maryland and the Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault.

Before the commission could rule, Judge Lamdin decided this week to retire rather than seek reappointment when his current 10-year term expires Oct. 14.

As if his remarks in December were not bad enough, the judge had been slapped down for similar conduct in 2008, when the Court of Appeals suspended him for 30 days without pay for mocking and berating defendants and others who appeared in his court.

At the time, his attorney said prophetically that Judge Lamdin had “acknowledged the error of his ways” and added: “You’d have to be deaf, dumb and blind not to understand that if you … do this again, something incredibly bad is going to happen to you.”

Now, retiring at age 64 with a $53,000-a-year pension may not meet everyone’s description of “something incredibly bad.” But a judge stepping down under a cloud with ample evidence on the public record revealing incredibly poor judgment and insensitivity is an appropriately painful end to a career.

“The conclusion to the case should help restore the public’s faith in the integrity and quality of the Maryland Judiciary,” said Steven P. Lemmey, investigative counsel for the Commission on Judicial Disabilities.

We can only hope.


  1. OMG! I just listened to this hearing. What an asshole!

    1. It is revolting. The Commission needs to keep its investigation OPEN and censure him. Also, what is WRONG with Baltimore County?!?

  2. I don’t even understand Cathy! Its just ridiculous!

  3. tired old radfem · ·

    What an asshole.

    And the Dems are NOT on the side of women. Let’s not kid ourselves. The only people on the side of women are feminists.

    Back to the hearing: he accuses her of “bowing to the almighty dollar.” And informs her she could have left, but she put “money” over “safety.” She could have gone anywhere!

    What. a. Jackass.

    HE should go to jail.

    He’s practically goading abusers into killing their victims, too – by taunting the victims with their “pieces of paper” that the men could just “shoot through.” That is, in fact, true – but that’s not the VICTIMS’ problem.

    I hate men on days like this.

    1. He is repulsive, and should not be allowed to retire. This is an embarrassment to justice.

  4. He deliberately dragged that out and tormented her, eventually giving her the order. Clearly the woman had compassion for the husband with the various problems, and the judge treated her like she was a gold digger. She was very honest, saying she wanted that time, in relative safety, to sort things out and make proper arrangements, with two kids and no money.

    1. Yes. His behavior was despicable.

      1. Do you have any information on the outcome for the woman?

      2. The judge gave her the order of protection. I don’t know anything beyond that. More press clippings here.

        I would rather not publish any other information here as her case is ongoing.

  5. “ongoing”. Thanks that helps.

%d bloggers like this: