The Kentucky Judicial Conduct Commission commenced a public hearing Monday in the case wherein six charges have been filed against Daviess County Family Court Judge Julie Hawes Gordon alleging abuse of power and misconduct. Up to 5 days have been allotted for the hearing, though it could take weeks for the JCC to issue a final order regarding any dismissal or reprimands.
Gordon testified for several hours Monday to begin the hearing. Proceedings will resume today and are being held in Bowling Green.
Allegations range from Gordon exerting influence to obstruct justice and affect the outcome of her son’s criminal proceedings, to abusing power, to not being impartial, and mismanaging her courtroom.
In November, the JCC made public a 133-page document that included the allegations and Gordon’s response to each of them. It also included numerous statements from public officials or others either named in the complaint or who work with Gordon. Gordon denied the “frivolous allegations.”
(For more on the charges, response, and proceedings process, click here.)
In December, Gordon agreed to a paid temporary suspension from her duties until a final decision is reached regarding the charges filed against her.
The JCC is the only entity authorized under the Kentucky Constitution to take disciplinary action against a sitting Kentucky judge. Gordon was elected to serve as a judge for the 6th Judicial Circuit in 2018.
According to the JCC document, Gordon was notified of the following charges:
- Count 1 — “During your tenure as Family Court Judge, you took numerous actions to exert your influence as Family Court Judge to obstruct justice and affect the outcome of your son, Dalton’s proceedings”
- Count 2 — “During your tenure as Family Court Judge, you abused your power, exceeded the authority of your position, and engaged in acts which brought your impartiality into question”
- Count 3 — “During your tenure as Family Court Judge, you mismanaged your courtroom and deviated from acceptable standards of judicial conduct”
- Count 4 — “During the Judicial Conduct Commission’s investigation into your practices as Family Court Judge, you demonstrated a lack of candor and misrepresented material facts to the Judicial Conduct Commission”
- Count 5 — “During your tenure as Family Court Judge, you failed to recognize and avoid conflicts of interest which brought your impartiality into question”
- Count 6 — “During your tenure as Family Court Judge, you have ignored and violated the law which brought your integrity into question and created the appearance of impropriety”
The initial complaint against Gordon was filed by Megan Jackson, who worked in Judge John McCarty’s office from July 2018 until Jackson resigned in March 2021. McCarty served for a short time as Daviess County’s second Family Court judge in addition to his role as a Hancock District Court judge. In early 2021, McCarty transitioned out of the Daviess County position to return to Hancock County full-time.
Complaint Review Process
According to their site, the JCC carefully reviews complaints to determine if they are within its jurisdiction. When the JCC finds sufficient cause, it will conduct a preliminary investigation. If the complaint is not resolved at this stage, the JCC may file formal charges against the judge and hold a fact-finding hearing.
The JCC’s attorney presents the case at the hearing and the judge has the right to defend against the charges and to be represented by an attorney. The person who filed the complaint may be subpoenaed as a witness if he or she has personal knowledge of wrongdoing.
If no misconduct is found, the complaint will be dismissed. If the JCC finds improper conduct by the judge or a disability that seriously interferes with the judge’s ability to perform judicial duties, the JCC may take any of the following actions:
- Privately admonish or privately reprimand the judge
- Publicly reprimand or suspend the judge
- Remove the judge from office or, in the case of disability, order the judge to retire from the bench
If the JCC files formal charges against a judge, the JCC makes public the charges and any response from the judge. All subsequent pleadings are also made public and any hearing related to the charges is public. Deliberations in reaching any decision regarding the charges are not public.
The complainant is notified of what action is taken unless the disposition is a private admonishment or private reprimand. Final disposition of some complaints takes several months or longer.
