Weekly civic intelligence report · v2.2
Court records reveal a misconduct inquiry into a federal judge. Details of the inquiry were newly released to the public.
A-score: Rule of law (3.5) reflects judicial accountability mechanisms functioning as designed - misconduct inquiry release shows transparency. Separation of powers (2.5) captures judicial branch internal oversight. Corruption (2.0) reflects potential ethical violations under investigation. Mechanism modifier 1.15 for judicial_legal_action with federal scope 1.1. Base calculation: (3.5×0.18 + 2.5×0.16 + 2.0×0.10)×1.0×1.0×1.15×1.1 = 2.1. B-score: Layer 1 scores moderately - outrage_bait (3.0) for judge misconduct angle, media_friendliness (4.0) for scandal narrative, novelty (2.5) for newly released records. Layer 2 minimal except pattern_match (1.0) for judicial scandal template. Four identical headlines indicate coordination (intentionality +3). Final B: (10.5×0.55 + 1.0×0.45)×1.13 = 6.1. Classification: A=2.1 (well below 25 threshold), narrow population scope, inquiry stage not findings, lacks specific constitutional mechanism damage. Four identical article titles with no substantive details suggests noise amplification.
Monitor for actual findings or disciplinary actions from misconduct inquiry. Current event represents procedural transparency (records release) rather than constitutional damage. Track if specific allegations emerge involving judicial capture, rights violations, or systemic corruption that would elevate constitutional significance.