Since part of this story is clearly untrue, I have to wonder if ANY of it is true.
“Furgeson now collects two federal pensions: One from the University of North Texas”.
1. A salary isn’t a pension.
2. The University of North Texas is a state, not a federal institution, and any pay would come from the state institution, not the federal government. ( As a side note, lest you think I’m defending the judge - the school is also unaccredited due to the fine work of Judge Ferguson - his admissions policies and academic standards) http://abovethelaw.com/2016/08/accreditation-woes-for-dallass-first-public-law-school/
How does a “US District Judge” get pay in that capacity from a “State”? Your assertion raises doubt from a different angle.
If it is the case that he’s getting something from the UNT connected with his past career as a state jurist, and something else from Uncle Sam connected with his later career as a Federal jurist, this looks even MORE damning, not less. A state good-old-boy was raised by a Demon-rat president to a stature where he carried on as a king for the benefit of the interests he once had known.
I’m not sure this would fly even with all of the left wing of the USSC.
As I recall, retired judges can sometimes still hear cases.
Hmm...so they still have to be impeached?
You are right to wonder how much of this is true. I took the trouble to download (from Westlaw) the series of legal documents that describe the full facts of the case described by the poster. I’ll probably open myself to a lot of abuse by saying this, but here’s my opinion:
I’d be the last one to deny that federal judges can sometimes be high-handed and abusive. That said, the original poster has, in my opinion, given a very misleading characterization of the facts in this saga. To say the least, Mr. Baron seems to have engaged in rather abusive legal tactics and, thus, justifiably raised the hackles of the judges concerned. There’s a venerable old saying, “you reap what you sow.” My advice is to take the original account here with, not a grain of salt, but a five-pound bag of salt. It was a highly partisan account. We cheapen our ability to condemn genuine abuses by disseminating, or accepting at face value, complaints that play fast and loose with the facts. My two cents!