Professional Discipline

   In a November 7, 2025 decision, the Supreme Court of Alaska considered the Petition of the Disciplinary Board of the Alaska Bar Association against Attorney Joshua Kindred (Kindred), who had resigned his position as a Judge of the Federal United States District Court of Alaska in July 2024.

Kindred was an inactive member of the Alaska Bar when the Petition for a Formal Hearing (Petition) was filed in January 2025. Mr. Kindred failed to answer the Petition, and thus the issues of misconduct laid out in the Petition were deemed admitted. These issues included consideration of possible sexual misconduct by Kindred. Allegations include that Kindred created a hostile work environment with frequent discussions of his personal life, including those of a sexual nature, engaged in unwanted sexual conduct–physical and verbal–with a former employee, and told employees with knowledge of the potential misconduct to maintain their silence. A Special Committee of several circuit court judges investigated the complaint, reviewing more than 700 pages of text messages between Kindred and his law clerks and interviewing Kindred, former and current staff, attorneys, and persons with relevant knowledge. During oral arguments, Kindred admitted that he had lied to the Special Committee throughout the investigation and the conduct violated the Alaska Rules of Professional Conduct. The Judicial Council determined that Kindred had committed misconduct and that the conduct “might constitute one or more grounds for impeachment under Article II of the Constitution.” The recommendation to consider impeachment was made to the US House of Representatives, recognizing that Kindred’s retirement may result in Congress declining to pursue impeachment.

The Area Hearing Committee (Committee) was convened to determine the extent of the final discipline in June 2025. The Committee agreed with and adopted the uncontested facts and the legal analysis set out in the Petition and agreed that disbarment was the appropriate sanction. Based on a review of the American Bar Association Standards and the misconduct at issue, the factors support disbarment from the practice of law for Kindred’s dishonesty, the imposition of a hostile work environment, and the personal impact on multiple law clerks. Here, this Court also considered the aggravating factors, including dishonest or selfish motives, the pattern of misconduct, multiple offenses, and bad faith in obstructing a disciplinary proceeding. Although there had not been prior discipline, given the entirety of the evidence before it, the findings of the Judicial Council are supported by substantial evidence of the record.

Disbarment recommended.