Allegheny County judge accused of racist remarks argues suspension unnecessary

The Allegheny County Common Pleas judge suspended for misconduct last month without pay has asked the state Court of Judicial Discipline to reverse its decision, saying it was made without due process.

The Judicial Conduct Board referred six misconduct charges against Mark V. Tranquilli alleging, among other claims, that he made racist comments about a juror following a January trial. In its petition seeking suspension, the board argued that anything less than that would cause the public to question the integrity of the court.

The court suspended Tranquilli on Aug. 26.

However, in a petition filed Sept. 3 — and posted to the court’s website Tuesday — Tranquilli argues that the request for suspension was unnecessary as he had already been de facto suspended in February.

On Jan. 24, after a verdict had been returned in a drug case, Tranquilli called both attorneys back into chambers. It was then, the Judicial Conduct Board alleges, that he used the phrase “Aunt Jemima” when referring to a young Black woman on the panel.

A short time later, Tranquilli’s comments began circulating in the legal community, and a referral was made to the Judicial Conduct Board, which triggered an investigation.

On Feb. 6, Allegheny County President Judge Kim Berkeley Clark removed Tranquilli from presiding over any individual cases and instead assigned him to administrative duties only.

Tranquilli said in an apology letter to his colleagues last month — after the charges were filed against him — that he was referring not to the woman on the jury but to the head wrap she was wearing.

In his petition filed with the court last week, Tranquilli argues that the suspension without pay deviates from the court’s prior practice in similar circumstances and deprived him of due process.

In the past, the filing said, the court has required hearings, arguments and briefings before ordering such a suspension.

“At present, respondent merely seeks an opportunity to be heard before the court makes modifications to the standard practices and procedures established by its rule and internal operating procedures,” the brief said.

Tranquilli also argued the suspension without pay causes “significant hardship” on him as his salary and benefits are the only source of income and health insurance for him and his children. He said that in two previous cases where an interim suspension without pay was ordered, both judges, who faced felony corruption charges, were permitted to retain their health insurance coverage.

In his filing, Tranquilli said he wants to accept some of the accusations against him, but also that some of the allegations are incorrect.

In his apology, Tranquilli explained his behavior by saying he had been physically and mentally exhausted at the time, having presided over several back-to-back trials.

He reiterated that argument in his filing with the court.

Tranquilli said he has a “diligent work ethic.” He said that when he was moved to the criminal division, he was assigned to preside over the sex offender court docket, and in his first year, presided over 24 jury trials .

The next year, the brief notes, there were only two judges handling sex offender court, and Tranquilli presided over 26 jury trials.

In 2019, Tranquilli said he handled 27% of the entire criminal division’s jury trials.

In January of the year, the brief said, Tranquilli presided over four jury trials — one each week — with verdicts being returned late on three consecutive Fridays.

The case that led to the investigation against him, the brief said, was the third jury trial that month.