Wapello County attorney faces suspension for explicit comments to employees
Were an elected prosecutor's comments in the office merely uncouth? Or did they amount to a breach of professional ethics?
Iowa's Attorney Discipline Board, which makes recommendations to the Supreme Court, believes Wapello County Attorney Reuben Neff is on the wrong side of that line. The board has recommended the court suspend his license for 60 days and require additional training after he engaged in a series of graphically sexual conversations and remarks that, in the board's view, constituted sexual harassment.
Neff argues that the offending statements, including homophobic slurs and musing about criminal defendants being raped, do not rise to the level of sexual harassment under professional rules for Iowa attorneys, and that construing the rules so broadly would run afoul of the First Amendment.
Arguing Neff's case Oct. 12 before the Iowa Supreme Court, attorney Matthew Sease said that the rules "(shouldn't) be a general civility code" and asked the court to either clear Neff of wrongdoing, or reduce his punishment from discipline to an admonishment.
What did Neff say at work?
Neff does not contest that he has made a number of off-color remarks to subordinates.
On multiple occasions, according to court filings, he has denigrated judges as "bitches" or more explicitly sexually derogatory terms in conversations with his staff. He also repeatedly described another person using a homophobic slur in conversation with a staff member, even after that employee objected. And the board accuses him of both permitting and contributing to an environment in which "subordinates were both unwilling to report sexual harassment and were themselves engaging in sexual harassment."
Some of his most lurid comments, according to court filings, were about criminal defendants his office was prosecuting. Neff repeatedly told employees he wished defendants would be forcibly sodomized, either in prison or, on one occasion, “raped by antelopes and mauled by lions at the same time.”
At least two female employees have said they left their jobs in the Wapello County Attorney's Office in part because of Neff's comments.
Board seeks 2-month suspension
Neff's conduct in his office amounts to sexual harassment under Iowa attorney rules, the board believes, pointing to past Iowa Supreme Court rulings. His comments about judges, even though not directed at employees themselves, "nevertheless reinforced gender hierarchy to his employees," and his repeated use of the homophobic slur had no "legitimate purpose" to the practice of law, according to the board's written filings.
As for Neff's graphic sexual comments about defendants, the board says Neff should know better than to say such things in a law office.
"The Board agrees that Neff is permitted to feel about criminal defendants any way he wishes, may expressthis ill will, and may even express himself in this exact manner — outside the practice of law," the board argues. "When he is in the practice of law, however, he may not subject his employees to crude comments that would evoke pornographic imagery; even less may he vocalize a wish for sexual violence upon a defendant."
Oral arguments: what can the state forbid?
Sease told the justices Thursday that Iowa's rule is too broad and sweeps up constitutionally protected speech alongside genuine harassment.
"I don’t think there’s anybody that could argue, if this was a Title VII (federal antidiscrimination) case, that it would even survive summary judgment, let alone be successful on the merits to say this was an unlawful violation," he said. "The actions in this case are not pervasive enough to rise to that level."
Attorney Robert Howard, arguing on behalf of the board, said the rules are written as they are for a reason: to prevent bad behavior from driving both attorneys and clients away from the courts.
"Why this rule was created was because, people were hearing about it. They were hearing that’s how lawyers behaved," he said. "It was driving women out of the practice of law or engaging with the practice of law."
The justices had skeptical questions for both sides, pushing Howard on how broadly the state could theoretically regulate attorney speech, and Sease on whether the court should relax the standard it has set for sexual harassment in previous cases.
The court will issue a decision at a later date.
William Morris covers courts for the Des Moines Register. He can be contacted at wrmorris2@registermedia.com, 715-573-8166 or on Twitter at @DMRMorris.
This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Iowa prosecutor accused of sexual harassment by state discipline board
