On Friday, June 13, 2025, Broward County Judge Lauren Peffer filed an answer to formal charges before the Investigative Panel of the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC), addressing allegations of violating Canons 7A(3)(b) and 7A(3)(e) of the Code of Judicial Conduct during her 2024 campaign.
The case is entitled “In the Matter of Judge Lauren Peffer,” with case number 2025-0647.
Judge Peffer denies the central allegation that she maintained a “win at all costs” attitude during the judicial election. According to the response, Peffer, a first-time judicial candidate with a background in animal rights advocacy and the founder of a non-profit animal rescue, engaged in a courteous and professional relationship with her opponent, who was known for his work in child advocacy and criminal defense. They reportedly maintained mutual respect throughout the election.
The formal charges stem from statements made during an interview with the Sun Sentinel’s editorial board. In preparation for the interview, Judge Peffer responded to a questionnaire that asked about the major challenges facing the judicial system in Broward County and the U.S. She identified “Ensuring Equity and Fair Treatment,” “Rebuilding Trust and Confidence,” and “Enhancing Public Awareness and Education” as the primary challenges.
In her written answer, Judge Peffer referenced “recent revelations from the Ninth Circuit” and highlighted what she described as an “image crisis” within Florida’s judiciary. She emphasized the importance of Broward County’s judiciary setting a standard for equitable and ethical treatment, transparency, accountability, and ethical conduct to rebuild trust and confidence in the judicial system.
During the Sun Sentinel interview, when asked for examples of challenges facing the judicial system, Judge Peffer mentioned a book by a former courthouse employee that was critical of the justice system. While she admitted to referencing the book, she stated that she had not read it and intended to use it as an example of existing criticism, not to promote its validity.
The charges also relate to a recording that was forwarded to Judge Peffer by another lawyer. She provided a link to this recording to the Sun Sentinel at the newspaper’s request. Judge Peffer admitted that she had not carefully listened to the call before referencing it but recalled that it contained criticism of the judiciary. After listening to the recording more closely in preparation for responding to the JQC charges, she concluded that the purported phone call was a “deep fake.”
In her response to the enumerated formal charges, Judge Peffer admitted that she did not research the claims made by the former Ninth Judicial Circuit employee before referencing them in her campaign and that she cited the book without having read it. She also admitted to briefly listening to the recording before providing the link to the editorial board and acknowledged hearing the excerpt of the recording on page two of the Notice of Formal Charges.
Judge Peffer further admitted that she did not attempt to ascertain whether the recording was fabricated before providing it to the Sun Sentinel. She denied the remaining allegations in paragraph 2 of the Notice of Formal Charges.
While Judge Peffer admitted to attending the judicial election training presented by the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee (JEAC) and being taught to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, she denied ignoring the JEAC.
She also admitted that she did not speak with the former Ninth Judicial Circuit employee or any of the judges or former judges identified in the book and recording. She admitted to not listening carefully to the entire recording before providing it to the editorial board and to not taking steps to determine whether the recording was legitimate, now recognizing it was fabricated. She denied helping facilitate the former employee’s farce.
Judge Peffer denies that her actions violated the Code of Judicial Conduct.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
