Have you ever wondered if federal appellate courts needed a theme song? The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit seems to think so, having recently released a YouTube music video that may raise more eyebrows than it educates. This new theme song, which can be found bubbling under the same viral skies as a Drake release, attempts a Temu Schoolhouse Rock style that neither captures the charm nor the catchiness of its educational predecessors.

The song kicks off with an animated sequence featuring a cartoon monkey on a rocket ship and an unexpectedly lively Ronald Reagan leading a conga line. It’s an odd artistic choice for a court that holds significant sway over matters like international trade policy—a topic that currently has the administration in a frenzy over tariffs.

Yet, it's a specific verse about judicial appointments and life tenure that has sparked particular interest and controversy:

"Now, you might ask, who wears the robe? Who gets to judge cases we know. The president picks. That’s how it’s done. Then the Senate confirms each one. They serve for life to stay independent and fair."

This verse is especially poignant considering the ongoing legal battle involving Judge Pauline Newman, who has been controversially suspended from hearing new cases. Her suspension, renewed annually since September 2023 by Chief Judge Kimberly Moore and other colleagues, is now the longest in American history for a federal judge. Despite multiple independent evaluations affirming her mental fitness, the court asserts it has the authority to "pocket impeach" her—a term used to describe the indefinite suspension without formal impeachment.

The irony of the song celebrating life tenure while the court itself is embroiled in a battle potentially undermining this principle has not gone unnoticed. Critics argue that this not only highlights a significant self-own by the court but also casts doubts on the sincerity and fairness of the judicial system.

Further stirring controversy, the music video features caricatures of the entire court, noticeably excluding Judge Newman. This exclusion appears as a symbolic erasure, considering her ongoing legal fight against what she perceives as a vindictive action by her colleagues.

Under these circumstances, the decision to exclude her from the video—or to even create caricatures at all—seems at best a questionable choice, and at worst a deliberate act of provocation.

The theme song has certainly succeeded in drawing attention, though perhaps not the kind the Federal Circuit might have hoped for. As the judiciary continues to navigate these complex and sensitive issues, the public watches and listens—sometimes to a soundtrack that seems more revealing of judicial tensions than of legal principles.