Their wrong actions? What wrong actions? The judge did their job: they considered the facts and the law, and applied their legal reasoning, and reached a conclusion.

The fact that you don't like the conclusion doesn't mean the judge acted wrongly. There's nothing to be held accountable for.

The reasoning or decision itself, on the other hand, will go through the processes of review that almost all judicial decisions go through.

IIRC, federal judges can be removed by impeachment. Very unlikely that this judge or any other would be impeached just for a controversial ruling, though: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_judge#...

Not a federal judge and not an impeachment, but a judge has been removed for a controversial ruling recently: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/06/06/judge-aaron-p...

Approximately 8 federal judges have been impeached in the last century:

https://www.fjc.gov/history/judges/impeachments-federal-judg...

That doesn't include how many resigned facing likely impeachment.

It isn't merely a controversial ruling, it might be easily construed as a favor to friends (police and/or the clerks who published the document by mistake).

When the filing is made before the appelate court. That's the way the system works.

That doesn't hold them accountable. Just stops their action from causing further harm.

I'm not sure that trying to prevent publication of something that was filed under seal is a "wrong action" by a judge...

It is an incorrect ruling, since it directly contradicts precedent.

This sort of thing often slows down promotions into higher courts (as it should — lower courts should not routinely waste everyone’s time and money with rulings that will surely be overturned on appeal).

It's incorrect from a legal perspective. Judges are required to act within the legal framework.