Maryland’s Supreme Court Removes Nigerian-American Judge Ademiluyi Over Misconduct

The Maryland Supreme Court has removed Nigerian-American Judge, April T. Ademiluyi, from the bench following findings of “egregious” misconduct.

In a per curiam order filed Monday, the court stated that the removal was the appropriate course of action due to the severity of Ademiluyi’s behaviour. The reasons behind the decision will be elaborated in a forthcoming opinion.

This decision followed a recommendation by the Maryland Commission on Judicial Disabilities. The commission unanimously found that Ademiluyi had refused training, shown bias towards criminal defendants, and had antagonised staff and colleagues. Despite her counsel’s request to dismiss and seal the case, arguing that Ademiluyi was a victim of retaliation, the Maryland Supreme Court upheld the commission’s findings.

Kendra Jolivet, executive counsel for the commission, emphasised during Monday’s arguments that “Judge Ademiluyi’s conduct was not reflective of the judiciary’s mission to provide fair, efficient, and effective justice for all. In fact, her actions were not fair, not efficient, and did not effectuate justice.”

Ademiluyi’s troubles began when she filed a complaint with the commission, alleging that one of her orders had been altered by another judicial colleague without her consent. Following the complaint, the commission launched an investigation, leading to further charges against her, including allegations of harassing a fellow judge and sharing confidential materials.

Judge Michael R. Pearson, a colleague from the Prince George’s County Circuit Court, testified before the commission that Ademiluyi had sent him unsolicited text messages and emails. These messages reportedly became more personal over time, prompting Pearson to respond that he was not interested in a personal relationship with her.

The Maryland Commission on Judicial Disabilities had initially recommended a censure and a six-month suspension without pay. However, the Maryland Supreme Court found removal to be a more appropriate consequence due to the gravity of the misconduct.