On Monday, March 23, 2026, the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission filed an amended complaint against Kenneth J. King, judge of the 36th District Court in Detroit, alleging multiple instances in which he exceeded his contempt powers and violated judicial conduct rules.
The commission’s filing recounts an August 13, 2024 incident in which a group of high school students visited King’s courtroom as part of a field trip. According to the complaint, King left the bench, removed his robe and addressed the students for approximately 45 minutes. When a teenage visitor fell asleep, King twice reacted by directing court security to escort her from the courtroom and later, after resuming the bench, ordered that she be taken into custody, dressed in a jail uniform, handcuffed and detained in a holding area for nearly two hours.
The commission alleges King imposed the measures without prior notice that sleeping could constitute contempt, without on-the-record factual findings or legal citation supporting a contempt determination, and at times when court was not in session. The complaint says the teenager’s sleeping occurred while King was off the bench and did not disrupt court proceedings. It further states King returned the teenager to the courtroom, publicly questioned her age and demeanor, referenced juvenile detention and the conditions of such facilities, and staged a “mock hearing” in which other students were asked to vote on whether she should be jailed. The commission alleges King did not permit evidence, did not provide notice of the hearing, and failed to assign counsel or allow the teenager and her attorney time to prepare.
The complaint asserts these actions violated multiple ethical canons, including obligations to be faithful to the law governing contempt, to treat courtroom participants with patience, dignity, and courtesy, and to avoid conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. The commission cites Canon 3(A)(1), 3(A)(3), 3(A)(15), Canon 3(C) and Michigan Court Rules 9.104(1) and 9.104(2).
A second count in the amended complaint recounts an incident on February 9, 2022 involving attorney Tyrone S. Bickerdt during a preliminary examination. The filing says the prosecutor requested an adjournment because discovery was incomplete. The complaint alleges King questioned whether the defense had received discovery, challenged the attorney’s representations, and ultimately ordered Bickerdt detained in a holding cell for several hours without declaring contempt or making requisite on-the-record findings. Bickerdt was later returned to the courtroom in handcuffs and discharged without a contempt finding, the commission states.
The commission alleges King’s conduct toward Bickerdt violated the same canons cited in the first count, including failure to maintain professional competence in contempt law and failure to treat the attorney with courtesy and fairness.
The amended complaint also notes that King’s conduct in the field-trip incident drew critical coverage from local, national, and international media and prompted public statements from court leadership and advocacy groups. The Judicial Tenure Commission’s filing states that an original verified answer to the complaint must be submitted within 14 days of service, warning that willful concealment or failure to answer may itself be grounds for disciplinary action.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
