The Docket — Issue 07

Recusal Season

Week of May 19, 2025 • Difficulty: Challenging

The Scenario

The JTC’s spring review cycle surfaced four judges from different corners of Michigan, each flagged through a different complaint pathway. Investigators noted that the outcomes ranged widely — from quiet dismissals to formal recommendations. Working backward from the paper trail, can you reconstruct who sat where and what happened to them? All judges and cases in this puzzle are fictional.

Clues

1. The judge from Marquette County received a private admonishment.
2. Judge Tanner was investigated for improper campaign conduct.
3. Judge Delacroix is not from Marquette County.
4. The judge investigated for retaliation against attorneys was recommended for suspension.
5. Judge Nakamura presided in Livingston County.
6. The judge from Isabella County was investigated for misuse of judicial office.
7. Judge Tanner is not from Isabella County.
8. Judge Delacroix received a consent agreement.
9. Judge Grayson is from Marquette County.
10. The judge investigated for improper campaign conduct was dismissed with a cautionary letter.

Your Grid

Solution

• Tanner — Eaton County — Improper campaign conduct — Dismissed with cautionary letter
• Delacroix — Isabella County — Misuse of judicial office — Consent agreement
• Nakamura — Livingston County — Retaliation against attorneys — Suspension (recommended)
• Grayson — Marquette County — Conflicts of interest — Private admonishment

The Docket publishes every Tuesday at 10:00 AM EST. Subscribe to Clutch Justice to get each new puzzle in your inbox. Miss last week? Play Issue 06.

From the editor

The patterns in these puzzles are fictional. The ones in Michigan’s courts aren’t. Rita maps those for a living.