Supported by Namecheap
Sponsor: Namecheap

Make more online, for less. Buy a domain and everything else you need.

Supreme Court Judge Erin Gall, Who Threatened to Shoot Black Teen Partygoers, Drops Appeal and Resigns

A welcome yet deeply unsatisfying coda[1] to an appalling story I linked to back in August, from Brian Lee at New York Law Journal:

A New York judge who's serving a suspension with pay for threatening to shoot Black teens, and had urged police to do so, for crashing a high school graduation party her family attended, will no longer appeal for her reinstatement, the Law Journal has learned.

State Supreme Court Justice Erin Gall of Oneida County said through a motion filed by her attorney that she’s no longer opposing the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct’s recommendation for the state’s top court to remove her.

The Commission, Lee writes,

[…] had unanimously voted to recommend Gall's removal for a “racially offensive, profane, prolonged public diatribe” [….]

Instead of appealing, she’s resigning:

“I have resigned from my position and have no intention to remain on the bench even if I were to succeed before the Court of Appeals,” the motion read.

I presume she’s resigning before she’s fired for cause—she would be prevented from ever being a judge again if she lost her appeal.

My unsupported-by-any-facts guess is that by avoiding a hearing she expects to lose, she preserves some standing with the Courts, and perhaps allows for a very lucrative pension she might otherwise be ineligible for if the appeal failed. There might even be a job offer that’s contingent on her being merely “a retired judge” rather than “a fired judge.”

(Is it too much to suggest such an offer would be with the incoming administration?)

Her official reason, though, is fear for her family:

In her motion she said that her “story has [been] carried by not only local but national news and social media. The attention incited numerous physical threats upon my family, requiring 24-hour law enforcement protection. In particular, my two sons received numerous death threats. The fear has been immeasurable and terrifying. I do not believe that I can move forward with arguing this appeal for fear that my family will be put in danger once again.”

Also:

Gall asked the Court of Appeals to give her a lifeline by rendering "no specific findings other than removal to help lessen any potential harm to my family due to social media and national news exposure.”

While I don’t doubt the threats upon her and her family, I do find it rich that she’s effectively pleading for mercy so she and her family aren’t ravaged on Bluesky and YouTube.

I found this bit especially exasperating:

“I certainly do not think it fair to characterize my reactions as racially motivated and to stigmatize me with that finding based on the facts in the case,” she added.

I’ve said it many times: Racists aren’t concerned about being racist, just being called racist.


  1. “Unsatisfying” because her behavior that night calls into question her impartiality, and, as I wrote in my original piece, “any cases which ever came before her involving police or Black people should probably be reviewed, if not tossed outright.” That this doesn’t seem to be happening is, yes, galling. ↩︎

⚙︎