Obama-Appointed Judge Accused Of Fabricating Quotes Wholesale

To typo is human. To falsely attribute quotes in a legal opinion is what’s alleged of U.S. District Court Judge Julien Neals. 

Neals delivered an opinion June 30, 2025, which caught the eye of attorney Andrew Lichtman. Lichtman had appeared before Neals on behalf of defendants in a recent civil suit. 

Lichtman issued a letter to the judge “bring[ing] to the Court’s attention a series of errors in the Opinion — including three instances in which the outcomes of cases cited in the Opinion were misstated (i.e., the motions to dismiss were granted, not denied) and numerous instances in which quotes were mistakenly attributed to decisions that do not contain such quotes.” (RELATED: SCOTUS Justice Seems Shocked Colleagues Actually Take Their Jobs Seriously)

Lichtman alleges six mistakes contained in the opinion. He lists several quotes which, he claims, Neals attributed to cases wherein they do not appear. 

DEI really gets the best of the best!

Judge Julien Neals, a Biden-appointed DEI federal judge is now under fire for issuing a legal opinion that contained made-up quotes and completely misstated case outcomes.https://t.co/xIAFNo6Zps

— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) July 27, 2025

No need to take Lichtman’s word for it. Simply: “Control + F.” 

Neals’ opinion cites City of Warwick Retirement System v. Catalent, Inc.: “The absence of insider trading is not dispositive.”

No such quote appears in the referenced document. 

Lichtman also claims Neals’ opinion “attributes two quotes to Defendants that they are not alleged to have made.” 

Neals withdrew his opinion following Lichtman’s letter, according to Bloomberg News. 

“That opinion and order were entered in error,” reads a notice posted by the court to the case docket, Bloomberg reports. “A subsequent opinion and order will follow. 

Absent comment from Neals or Lichtman, speculation plods towards the simplest explanation for the odd opinion: a bad use of artificial intelligence. 

Bloomberg and The Volokh Conspiracy, a blog written by law professors and legal scholars, suggest AI may be the culprit in this case. 

“I suspect there are many judges throughout the country that have issued opinions with hallucinations,” writes constitutional law professor Josh Blackman for Volokh. “Savvy litigators should start combing through all adverse orders, and try to determine if there are obvious indicia of hallucinations. This will make excellent grounds for reversal on appeal.”

Blackman suspects a law clerk, rather than 60-year-old Neals, was responsible for the errors. 

“Still, one might ask how closely Judge Neals, and other judges, review the work of their law clerks,” Blackman continues. “Do the judges actually check the citations to see if they are hallucinated? I would suspect most judges do not check citations.”

“An enterprising sleuth could do a close analysis of all opinions from Judge Neals, and judges nationwide, and perhaps find a pattern of misconduct. Would that record show a judge cannot be trusted to exercise the judicial power?”

Neals was initially nominated to the district court by former President Barack Obama in February 2015. He was renominated by former President Joe Biden in March 2021, along with ten other judicial candidates, including now-Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. 

Biden’s White House statement cites “the President’s deeply-held conviction that the federal bench should reflect the full diversity of the American people – both in background and in professional experience.”

It vaunts the racial diversity of the group, which “includes groundbreaking nominees, including three African American women chosen for Circuit Court vacancies, as well as candidates who, if confirmed, would be the first Muslim American federal judge in U.S. history, the first AAPI woman to ever serve on the U.S. District Court for the District of D.C., and the first woman of color to ever serve as a federal judge for the District of Maryland.” 

Biden’s statement praises the nominees as representative of “the broad diversity of background, experience, and perspective that makes our nation strong.”

At a minimum, this qualifies as an optics misfire. Biden constantly invoked the racial and sexual qualifications of his administrative picks. Many of those picks turned in subpar performances in a very public forum. 

He was “proud to announce today the first senior White House communications team comprised entirely of women.” Total transparency, brought to you by the Biden ladies. 

Karine Jean-Pierre To Immigrant Reporter: ‘I Don’t Even Understand That Question’ pic.twitter.com/V1Fsij2FjY

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) October 19, 2022

Then there was White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, who informed the public, “I am a black, gay, immigrant woman. The first of all three to hold this position.” That was the first day on the job. 

“Representation does matter. You hear us say this often in this administration, and no one understands this better than President Biden,” Jean-Pierre said. (RELATED: Team Biden’s Implosion Exposes Democrats’ Biggest Lie)

As a candidate, he pledged to nominate a black woman to the Supreme Court — a promise he fulfilled with Jackson. 

Jackson’s legal acumen is best summed up in one sentence from fellow Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney-Barrett: “We will not dwell on Justice Jackson’s argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself.”

A minor share of sympathy might be reserved for those promoted under the auspices of “diversity.” Few would accuse Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas of being a “DEI pick.” But Neals and Jackson’s proffered credentials will probably forever be stained by the racial consciousness of the 2010s. 

Follow Natalie Sandoval on X: @NatSandovalDC