Judge Alsup is a badass.
If we could have 10 like him processing cases the world would be a more just place.
This isn't something I'm clear on. Maybe someone here is a lawyer and can offer some insight.
Yes, he's a badass but under what rules can the judge completely disallow courtroom access for specific individuals doing representation work? I can see malfesience, disruption, or ethics being reasons - but being illprepared resulting in sanctions (? maybe, not sure of the right word, perhaps censure) against specific individuals seems like it might require a high standard, as choice of representation is a pretty solid privilege.
Like you said, a badass. Judges have awesome powers in their courtroom, but I'm not sure I've seen anything quite like this and I'm unsure of the rules surrounding it. I'm sure there are rules. Courts love their procedure. They've got rules for everything.
The judge told Arturo he wouldn't reschedule for him. He's not barring him from the courtroom; the judge is simply saying he's not making any more accomodations for Uber.
A judge can kick a specific attorney out of the courtroom, but I think the standards are pretty high for doing so. I don't know if that's just custom or an established rule.
Judges have some awesome powers inside their courtrooms. I find law to be a pretty fascinating subject but that is a long post for another day.
I took the question to ask more or less, "Is their any judicial obligation to avoid scheduling conflict, when the attorney is already obligated to be present at a different court-related function".
I assume this is usually granted by courtesy, but a fed up judge has no obligation to do so.
IANAL.