Sexism is pervasive in the legal profession, and it’s highly unusual if a week passes and there isn’t something to decry about the way women are treated by their male colleagues. From pay inequities and being passed up for partnership to constant lectures about the way they ought to dress, act, and speak, women lawyers have been given the short end of the stick in what was once considered a noble calling.

Worse yet, when it comes to achieving any sense of work/life balance, each action a woman lawyer takes is scrutinized with intensity — there are always questions raised as to her true dedication to her work. Should a woman lawyer be so bold as to become pregnant and then take maternity leave, then all bets are off. Colleagues will sigh with exasperation and fault their pregnant coworker for putting more work on their shoulders while the lawyer with child goes off to enjoy her “vacation” from the job.

It seems that even judges are fed up with women attorneys and their pesky maternity leave….

Last week, Georgia lawyer Stacy M. Ehrisman-Mickle was forced to attend an immigration hearing with her infant child because Judge J. Dan Pelletier, Sr. refused to approve her motion for a continuance of the matter due to her maternity leave. These are the motion papers Ehrisman-Mickle submitted to the court:

That certainly seems like it should have been a cut-and-dried matter. Ehrisman-Mickle is a solo practitioner, she doesn’t have anyone who can assist her, and under her treating physician’s orders, she was supposed to be on maternity leave during the time of the scheduled hearing. Case closed? Not quite.

Judge Pelletier didn’t rule on the unopposed motion until October 2, less than one week before the hearing:

Ehrisman-Mickle’s motion was denied because Judge Pelletier found that she had “no good cause,” specifically because the “hearing date [was] set prior to counsel accepting [the] representation.” Left without a choice in the matter, and rather than leaving her clients high and dry, Ehrisman-Mickle attended the hearing with her newborn, only to allegedly have her parenting skills questioned by the judge.

As you can imagine, Ehrisman-Mickle was very upset about what allegedly occurred in court last week — so upset, in fact, that she decided to file a formal complaint against Judge Pelletier for his overt sexism. Here’s a brief excerpt from her complaint, which is available in full on the following page:

I was forced to bring my weeks old daughter with me as day care centers do not accept infants less than 6 weeks of age and I have no family in Georgia that could help me look after my baby. … When the IJ saw me with my daughter, he was outraged. He scolded me for being inappropriate for bringing her. He questioned the fact that day care centers do not accept infants less than 6 weeks of age. He then questioned my mothering skills as he commented how my pediatrician must be appalled that I am exposing my daughter to so many germs in court. He humiliated me in open court.

The rest of Ehrisman-Mickle’s complaint reads like the battle cry for women attorneys across the country. Point by point, she expertly denounces outdated perceptions about working women in the law.

No, child birth should not be considered a “minor inconvenience,” and no, women lawyers should not be forced to “stop practicing law upon becoming pregnant” in order to fulfill their purported roles as servile housekeepers to please old-fashioned judges. Women lawyers should not be forced into situations like this just because they live in one of the countries with the worst accommodations for working mothers in the world. At some point, we need to recognize that those who are bringing new life into this world — while at the same time juggling demanding careers in the law — deserve a much-needed break.

It’s a shame some men in the legal profession still feel women are undeserving of these accommodations.

(Flip to the next page to see the complaint Ehrisman-Mickle filed against Judge Pelletier.)