Why wasn't SDNY Judge Shira Scheindlin criminally prosecuted under 28 U.S.C. 454 or impeached?

There is a federal statute, 28 U.S.C. 454 that states:

"Any justice or judge appointed under the authority of the United States who engages in the practice of law is guilty of a high misdemeanor."

It is a criminal statute.

In provides for (1) criminal prosecution of a federal judge who practices law;  and, since engagement in "high crimes and misdemeanors" is grounds for impeachment, it provides for (2) impeachment of a federal judge who practices law.

In October 2013, and then in November 2013, by sua sponte order of the 2nd Circuit, it was established that Judge Shira Scheindlin did engage in the practice of law by giving legal advice to certain individual as to how to sue New York City, see my blog about that decision, with scans as to how exactly Judge Scheindlin advocated for the potential civil rights plaintiffs, here.

Yet, over two years down the road, Judge Scheindlin is still neither impeached nor criminally prosecuted and remains on the bench.

This is not "just" an ethical violation.

This is a judge who very obviously committed a crime - and still remains on the bench.

Why isn't Preet Bharara taking on investigating and prosecuting Judge Scheindlin?  Too scary for his law license?

And, by the way - some legal blogs commenting on Judge Scheindlin's removal from the case Floyd v New York City, incredibly, commented that the 2nd Circuit did not find any misconduct in what Judge Scheindlin did.

Even if the 2nd Circuit did not in so many words mention 28 U.S.C. 454, the order of removal from a case reciting Judge Scheindlin's legal advice to one party how to file an additional lawsuit against the other party, is undoubtedly the practice of law, forbidden to federal judges by statute.

So, committing a crime of practicing law by a federal judge is not misconduct in the eyes of legal commentator.

Nice.