Meet the law students working to bring workplace protections to federal courts

Students Championing Workplace Rights in the Federal Judiciary

Meet the law students working to bring - For many law students, federal court positions are a dream come true. Internships and clerkships are often seen as prestigious opportunities to gain hands-on experience in the legal field. Yet, these students may soon discover that the very system they aspire to join offers limited safeguards for their rights and well-being.

The judicial branch has long operated under its own rules, granting judges significant authority over the work environment. This includes control over hours, holidays, and workplace dynamics. As a result, court employees, such as clerks, probation officers, and public defenders, have few avenues to address harassment or discrimination. Without external oversight, complaints can go unresolved, leaving workers vulnerable to systemic issues.

A Student-Led Initiative to Challenge the Status Quo

A group of law students at Emory University in Atlanta is working to change this reality. They recently filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the internal system that allows the judiciary to police itself. This effort marks a bold step in advocating for civil rights protections that are typically extended to other workers in the United States.

Unlike employees in most sectors, federal court workers are not covered by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This landmark law prohibits workplace harassment and discrimination, but its protections do not apply to those within the judicial branch. Consequently, individuals facing injustice in their roles have to rely on the courts’ self-regulated mechanisms, which often lack impartiality.

Sofia Bettini, a recent graduate of Emory Law School, explained why the students chose to focus on this issue. "When we started working with the Supreme Court Advocacy Program, it felt like a clear-cut case," she said. "The protections we take for granted in other jobs—like fair treatment and accountability—are absent here, even though they seem fundamental."

Bettini’s peers, many of whom plan to pursue careers in the judiciary, found the situation deeply personal. "It’s not just about the law anymore; it’s about the people who work within it," she added. The students emphasized that the lack of an independent decision-maker creates a real risk: speaking up could cost a worker their job, reputation, or even their safety.

Challenging the Judiciary’s Internal Framework

The case the students are supporting centers on the judiciary’s self-policing system. While this framework allows courts to manage their own affairs, it raises questions about whether it ensures due process and equal protection for all employees. The petition argues that the current structure leaves workers without the basic rights they deserve in the workplace.

Andrew Taramykin, another student involved in the effort, spent considerable time researching Title VII for the petition. "The law is clear: harassment and discrimination are unacceptable," he said. "But federal court workers are treated as an exception, even though they’re part of the broader workforce." Taramykin highlighted that Congress extended Title VII protections to congressional employees in 1995, suggesting an intent to include federal court staff as well.

Despite this legislative intent, the judiciary has maintained its autonomy. Each federal circuit court now has its own human resources system to handle disputes, but these rules often place judges in the role of both employer and arbiter. This creates a conflict of interest, as judges can influence outcomes involving colleagues they know personally.

A Movement for Justice in the Legal System

The Emory law students are not the first to challenge this system, but their initiative has brought renewed attention to the issue. A previous NPR investigation revealed that clerks and other court workers frequently encounter abuse without effective recourse. This lack of support has led to a culture of silence, where victims hesitate to report misconduct for fear of retaliation.

Caryn Strickland, a former federal public defender who alleges she faced sexual harassment, praised the students for taking her case to the Supreme Court. "It’s inspiring to see young lawyers step up and fight for the rights of those in the judiciary," she said in a written statement. "Without their courage, we might never get the justice we deserve."

Professor Paul Koster, who oversees the Emory program, noted that this is the only student-led Supreme Court litigation initiative in the country. "These students are driven by passion, not credit," he said. "They’re dedicating time and energy to a cause that matters deeply, even if it means sacrificing grades for the sake of justice."

The students’ work is part of a larger conversation about workplace equity in the legal sector. While the judiciary’s internal system is designed for efficiency, it has also enabled a lack of transparency. As one student put it, "The courts are a special place, but that shouldn’t mean their employees are treated as second-class citizens."

Supporters of the current system argue that it provides a streamlined way to resolve disputes. However, critics like Bettini and Taramykin contend that this independence comes at a cost. "Judges are meant to be impartial, but when they’re also in charge of their own workplace policies, that balance is disrupted," Bettini said. "It’s like having a courtroom inside the courtroom."

As the Supreme Court reviews the petition, the students remain hopeful. Their efforts underscore a growing recognition that workplace protections must extend to all workers, regardless of their position. "This isn’t just about one case," Taramykin added. "It’s about setting a precedent that ensures fairness for everyone in the legal system."

The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts has not yet commented on the petition, but it has defended the judiciary’s internal system as robust. The office claims that recent changes have made it easier for employees to report wrongdoing, though these reforms have not addressed the fundamental issue of judicial oversight.

For now, the students’ campaign continues, fueled by the belief that the courts should uphold the same standards they enforce in other workplaces. Their fight reflects a broader movement to challenge institutional norms and ensure that those who serve the law are also protected by it.