William Bertelsman

William Odis Bertelsman is an Article III federal judge for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. He joined the court in 1979 after being nominated by President Jimmy Carter. Bertelsman is serving on senior status.

Early life and education[edit]

A native of Cincinnati, Bertelsman graduated from Xavier University with his Bachelors degree in 1958 and later graduated from the University of Cincinnati College of Law with his J.D. in 1961.^[1]

Professional career[edit]

Bertelsman started his legal career being a Private Practice attorney in Newport, KY from 1962 to 1979. From 1963 to 1964, Bertelsman took a brief recess from law practice as he served in the US Army as a Captain during the Vietnam Conflict from 1963 to 1964. After returning from Vietnam, Bertelsman was also a part-time lecturer at the University of Cincinnati College of Law in addition to being a private practice lawyer from 1965 to 1972. Bertelsman also served as a Adjunct professor of law for the Salmon P. Chase College of Law in 1989.^[1]

Judicial career[edit]

Eastern District of Kentucky[edit]

On the recommendation of Senator Wendell Ford, Bertelsman was nominated by President Jimmy Carter on October 11, 1979 to a new judgeship created by 92 Stat. 1629 which was approved by Congress. Bertelsman was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on November 26, 1979 on a Senate vote and received commission on November 27, 1979. Bertelsman served as Chief Judge of the Court from 1991 to 1998 before assuming senior status on February 1, 2001.^[1]

Noteworthy cases[edit]

Roberts v. Neace (2020)[edit]

See also: Lawsuits about state actions and policies in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, 2020-2021

Roberts v. Neace: On May 4, 2020, Judge William Bertelsman, of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, enjoined the state from enforcing its ban on interstate travel. In his order, Bertelsman wrote, "After careful review, the Court concludes that the Travel Ban does not pass constitutional muster. The restrictions infringe on the basic right of citizens to engage in interstate travel, and they carry with them criminal penalties." Bertelsman rejected a challenge to limits placed on mass gatherings, including church services. Bertelsman wrote, "Plaintiffs are not alone in having their lives and activities disrupted by it and the measures that our federal and state governments have taken to address it. Indeed, it is hard to imagine that there is any American that has not been impacted. But unless a law can be shown to have religion within its cross-hairs, either facially or in application, the fact that religious practices are impinged by it does not contravene the First Amendment."^[2]

Judge dismisses case against Washington Post[edit]

On July 26, 2019, Judge William Bertelsman dismissed a case against the Washington Post brought by high school student Nick Sandmann. Sandmann filed a defamation lawsuit against the Washington Post and other media outlets after they reported on a January 2019 encounter between Sandmann, his fellow classmates from Covington Catholic High, and Native Americans in Washington, D.C.

The suit stated:

“

[T]he Post engaged in a modern-day form of McCarthyism by competing with CNN and NBC, among others, to claim leadership of a mainstream and social media mob of bullies which attacked, vilified, and threatened Nicholas Sandmann ("Nicholas"), an innocent secondary school child. The Post wrongfully targeted and bullied Nicholas because he was the white, Catholic student wearing a red "Make America Great Again" souvenir cap on a school field trip.... [T]he Post knew and intended that its false and defamatory accusations would be republished by others, including media outlets and others on social media.^[3]^[4]

”

In his ruling, Bertelsman said,

“

The Court accepts Sandmann's statement that, when he was standing motionless in the confrontation with Phillips, his intent was to calm the situation and not to impede or block anyone. However, Phillips did not see it that way. He concluded that he was being 'blocked' and not allowed to 'retreat.' He passed these conclusions on to The Post. They may have been erroneous, but as discussed above, they are opinion protected by the First Amendment. And The Post is not liable for publishing these opinions.^[5]^[4]

”

Following the judge's dismissal, the Washington Post released a statement through a spokesperson: "From our first story on this incident to our last, we sought to report fairly and accurately the facts that could be established from available evidence, the perspectives of all of the participants, and the comments of the responsible church and school officials."^[6]

The Sandmann family planned to appeal Bertelsman's ruling. “I believe fighting for justice for my son and family is of vital national importance," said Ted Sandmann, Nick's father. "If what was done to Nicholas is not legally actionable, then no one is safe.”^[6]