H.Res. 1351

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1351 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. RES. 1351

Impeaching Eleanor Louise Ross, Judge of the United States District 
Court for the Northern District of Georgia, for high crimes and 
misdemeanors.

_______________________________________________________________________

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

June 9, 2026

Mr. Clyde (for himself, Mr. Gosar, Mr. Ogles, Mrs. Biggs of South 
Carolina, Mr. Harris of Maryland, Mr. Carter of Georgia, Mr. Carter of 
Texas, Ms. Boebert, Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Scott Franklin of Florida, Mr. 
Babin, Mr. Brecheen, Mr. Self, Mr. Crane, and Mr. Biggs of Arizona) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

RESOLUTION

Impeaching Eleanor Louise Ross, Judge of the United States District 
Court for the Northern District of Georgia, for high crimes and 
misdemeanors.

Resolved, That Eleanor Louise Ross, a Judge of the United States 
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, is impeached for 
high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of 
impeachment be exhibited to the Senate.
Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives 
of the United States of America in the name of itself and all of the 
people of the United States of America, against Eleanor Louise Ross, a 
judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of 
Georgia, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against her for 
high crimes and misdemeanors.

article i

Incident to her position as a United States District Court Judge, 
Eleanor Louise Ross has engaged in conduct with respect to improper 
sexual activity in chambers with a law enforcement officer that is 
incompatible with the trust and confidence placed in her as a judge, as 
follows:
(1) For a period of roughly 2 years, from around October 
2023 through October 2025, Judge Ross participated in an 
extramarital affair with high-ranking Atlanta Police Department 
officer, Kelley Collier.
(2) Mr. Collier was undoubtedly involved in numerous 
criminal and civil cases being litigated in the Northern 
District of Georgia.
(3) Judge Ross did not disclose the affair to any other 
judge, court staff member, or litigating party.
(4) The undisclosed affair created the possibility that 
Judge Ross would be assigned to handle a case in which Mr. 
Collier or his employing police department had an interest, 
thus creating or appearing to create a conflict of interest.
(5) Further, Judge Ross and Mr. Collier, while in Judge 
Ross' chambers and during business hours, engaged in intimate 
contact, including, by admission of Judge Ross, sexual 
intercourse.
(6) At least 3 of Judge Ross' former clerks heard sounds 
resulting from the intimate contact coming from Judge Ross' 
chambers, thereby adversely affecting those staff members.
(7) Judge Ross' conduct regarding the relationship 
demonstrated a gross lack of judgment and created an 
uncomfortable and troubling workplace for staff members.
(8) Moreover, the undisclosed affair left Judge Ross 
vulnerable to extortion, as the Officer's spouse and Judge 
Ross' spouse were both unaware of the relationship, and the 
relationship could be used as leverage against a sitting 
Federal judge.
(9) Judge Ross' behavior violated multiple provisions of 
the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, including--
(A) Canon 2, which provides that ``a judge should 
avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in 
all activities'';
(B) Canon 2(A), which adds that ``A judge should 
respect and comply with the law and should act at all 
times in a manner that promotes public confidence in 
the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary''; and
(C) the commentary to Canon 2(A), which further 
explains that ``public confidence in the judiciary is 
eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges, 
including harassment and other inappropriate workplace 
behavior''.
Wherefore, Judge Eleanor Louise Ross is guilty of high crimes and 
misdemeanors and should be removed from office.

article ii

Eleanor Louise Ross engaged in judicial misconduct by attending a 
partisan political event, as follows:
(1) Judge Ross attended an event hosted by Fulton County 
District Attorney Fani Willis' campaign, as conceded by Judge 
Ross during the investigation.
(2) Judge Ross attended the event the evening before she 
was scheduled to preside over a criminal revocation proceeding 
in her own courtroom.
(3) The following morning, Judge Ross stated to court 
interns and staff that she had consumed ``too many martinis'' 
the night before at an event hosted by the district attorney's 
campaign.
(4) Judge Ross violated the Code of Conduct for United 
States Judges, including--
(A) Canon 5, which states that ``a judge should 
refrain from political activity''; and
(B) Canon 5(A)(1)(3), which explicitly prohibits a 
judge from attending ``a dinner or other event 
sponsored by a political organization or candidate'' 
and a ``political organization'' includes ``a group 
affiliated with a political party or candidate for 
public office''.
Wherefore, Judge Eleanor Louise Ross is guilty of high crimes and 
misdemeanors and should be removed from office.

article iii

Eleanor Louise Ross corruptly obstructed, influenced, or impeded 
an official proceeding, as follows:
(1) In September 2025, the Chief Circuit Judge of the 
Eleventh Circuit received a complaint against Judge Ross based 
on a memorandum received from the Chief District Judge of Judge 
Ross' court that suggested possible misconduct by Judge Ross.
(2) On September 29, 2025, the Chief Circuit Judge notified 
Judge Ross of the report made by the Chief District Judge and 
requested that Judge Ross respond to the allegations in the 
Chief District Judge's memo no later than October 20, 2025.
(3) Later the same day, Judge Ross submitted a response 
that denied each allegation and characterized the allegations 
as ``outrageous'' and ``baseless''.
(4) The same day, Judge Ross also sent an email to the 
Chief District Judge denying the allegations and denying that 
Judge Ross knew the identity of the alleged visitor to her 
chambers.
(5) On September 30, 2025, after receiving Judge Ross' 
response, the Chief Circuit Judge appointed a special committee 
to investigate the allegations in the complaint. The special 
committee subsequently retained experienced counsel to assist 
in conducting the investigation.
(6) The special committee found that Judge Ross made 
numerous, material false statements to the Chief Circuit Judge 
and the Chief District Judge when initially responding to the 
allegations.
(7) Specifically, Judge Ross falsely stated ``I have never 
engaged in sexual intercourse in my office, nor anywhere else 
in the Courthouse''. Judge Ross further falsely stated that she 
was ``not sure who this allegation concerns or whether it is 
alleged to have occurred with different individuals'' and that 
she was ``astounded and confused, and have no idea what this 
clerk is referring to''.
(8) Judge Ross did not recant these false statements until 
October 10, 2025, 11 days after making them, by which time the 
special committee had already gathered significant 
corroborating evidence. The special committee found that Judge 
Ross' recantation came only after she likely knew her false 
statements had been, or were about to be, exposed, and declined 
to treat the recantation as absolution.
(9) Rule 4(a)(5) of the Judicial-Conduct Rules states that 
cognizable misconduct includes ``refusing, without good cause 
shown, to cooperate in the investigation of a complaint''.
(10) Judge Ross' failure to truthfully respond to Chief 
Judge Pryor's inquiry constituted a failure to cooperate in the 
investigation of the complaint and thus an instance of 
cognizable judicial misconduct.
(11) Not only did Judge Ross fail to fulfill her duty to 
self-report under Rule 4(a)(6), but her false statements to 
Chief Judge Pryor and to the Chief District Judge constituted 
affirmative attempts to prevent the Chief Judges from learning 
of her misconduct, thereby obstructing the judicial conduct 
process established by Congress.
(12) Further, under Section 1001 of Title 18, United States 
Code (18 U.S.C. 1001), it is a felony to ``knowingly and 
willfully'' make ``any materially false, fictitious, or 
fraudulent statement or representation'' on any ``matter within 
the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial 
branch'' of the Federal Government.
(13) In making numerous, material false statements to the 
Chief Circuit Judge and the Chief District Judge, Judge Ross' 
conduct would constitute a felony in violation of 18 U.S.C. 
1001 in any other Federal context, reflecting the gravity of 
the misconduct and the degree to which it subverted the 
integrity of an official proceeding.
Wherefore, Judge Eleanor Louise Ross is guilty of high crimes and 
misdemeanors and should be removed from office.
<all>