Alaska federal judge scandal takes center stage in heliski dispute

(CN) — A former Alaska federal judge’s sexual misconduct with United States attorneys took center stage during an outdoor tour company’s appeal of judgment in favor of the U.S. Forest Service on Monday.

Silverton Mountain Guides sued the Forest Service in 2022, challenging the agency’s rejection of its application for a permit to conduct guided helicopter skiing operations in the Chugach National Forest.

Former U.S. District Judge Joshua Kindred was assigned to the case and had a “pathological tendency to lie” as well as documented workplace impropriety that impacted his impartiality over the tour company’s case, argued Dominic Draye, attorney with Greenberg Traurig representing the tour company.

President Donald Trump appointed Kindred to serve as a District Court judge in Alaska in 2020. Kindred resigned in 2024, the same day the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit released a report finding he created a hostile work environment by having an inappropriate, unwanted sexual relationship with one of his law clerks, who then became an assistant United States attorney. The council also reported Kindred received nude photographs from a different, more senior United States attorney.

Kindred was assigned to the tour company’s case against the Forest Service, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office represented the agency. In 2023, Kindred entered a final judgment in favor of the Forest Service amid the investigation into his misconduct.

The tour company asked for relief from the judgment after Kindred resigned, but the new judge assigned to the case denied the request.

The tour company told the Ninth Circuit on Monday that Kindred’s judgment should be tossed because the former judge was unable to be impartial, given the entanglement with multiple U.S. attorneys and then-pending investigation.

“The judicial counsel was correct that former Judge Kindred’s abhorrent behavior would cause reasonable people to question his impartiality, and how could it not? The facts in this case are exceptional,” Draye said.

But the Ninth Circuit questioned what made this case different from any of the others Kindred oversaw during his investigation.

“The groundwork you’re laying seems to me to be an argument for every single case that Judge Kindred touched has to be undone because he was unethical, and we can’t trust any decision that he made. Is that your argument?” asked U.S. Circuit Judge Danielle Forrest, a Trump appointee.

The tour company argued cases in which the government was involved as a party should be analyzed for a conflict of interest.

Plus, the company noted it was only days after Kindred was assigned the case that the Ninth Circuit appointed a special committee to start investigating him.

“He had become, as the judicial council said, obsessed with maintaining secrecy,” Draye said. “So it is during our case exactly, the timing is uncanny where the maximum incentive for him to curry favor with the U.S. attorney’s office was at its zenith.”

U.S. Circuit Judge Morgan Christen, a Barack Obama appointee, noted neither of the two attorneys involved in the investigation was assigned to the tour company’s case against the Forest Service, as both were criminal lawyers.

The tour company argued the investigation gave Kindred an incentive to rule in favor of the government.

“The judge doesn’t know who in that office knows and doesn’t know, but everything about his life depends on this,” Draye said.

But the Forest Service disagreed.

“Former Judge Kindred’s creation of a hostile work environment and his sexual misconduct toward clerks and attorneys was abhorrent and inexcusable,” said Derek Weiss, Justice Department attorney. “But the question in this case is whether they should lead to reopening a final judgment in a case where none of the parties and none of the attorneys were involved in that scandal.”

Forrest noted there was no evidence showing any of the civil attorneys in the U.S. Attorney’s Office were aware of the details of the investigation into Kindred but also suggested word may have gotten around within the small office.

“We don’t have to have proof of an actual conflict or actual bias; it’s the appearance, right?” Forrest said. “His impartiality might reasonably be questioned, so in that context, doesn’t inference play maybe a bigger role than it otherwise would if you had to prove an actual impartiality or a bias?”

But the Forest Service again argued there was no evidence to support that notion. Plus, even if Kindred should have recused himself from the case, the judgment should not be vacated as doing so would risk undermining the public’s confidence.

In rebuttal, the tour company urged the Ninth Circuit panel to consider Kindred’s incentive to curry favor with the two U.S. attorneys involved in the investigation.

“The second one of them breaks their silence, this guy’s life is over. He has every incentive,” Dray said.

The Ninth Circuit panel, which also included U.S. Circuit Judge Sidney R. Smith, a Bill Clinton appointee, did not indicate when it would rule.