The power of the robe is supposed to come with restraint. It is a reminder that judges are entrusted not just with interpreting the law but with embodying the stability and fairness of the justice system itself. And yet, the latest stories from Louisiana, Washington, South Carolina, and Oklahoma remind us how fragile that trust can be.
Take Louisiana Judge Royale Colbert. In two separate incidents, his behavior blurred the line between judicial authority and personal impulse. A courtroom meeting conducted in gym clothes, profanity flying, no record kept. A traffic stop where anger, insults, and inconsistent explanations overshadowed accountability. The Judiciary Commission has recommended a suspension, anger management, and costs. But the deeper damage is to the public’s faith in the impartiality of the bench. When a judge mirrors the behavior of someone above the law, the robe itself loses weight.
Then there’s the quieter—but no less troubling—conflict of interest raised by Fix the Court’s report on federal judges teaching at universities. More than twenty judges heard cases involving the very schools where they are adjunct professors. Some may argue that teaching a class is harmless, but appearances matter. If justice must not only be done but be seen to be done, even a faint whiff of bias corrodes the system. Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett have shown that recusals are possible, even when inconvenient. Why should others not follow suit?
Meanwhile, in South Carolina, Dylann Roof tried to push Judge Richard Gergel off his case, claiming bias. The Fourth Circuit said no. The evidence didn’t meet the standard, and Roof still has legal avenues left. This case is a stark reminder: judges are accused of bias from both sides, sometimes fairly, sometimes as a tactic. The courts must walk the narrow path between ensuring fairness and rejecting spurious claims meant to derail justice.
And in Oklahoma, Judge Heather Coyle recused herself at the eleventh hour from Richard Glossip’s case, leaving a man who has lived under the shadow of death row once again in limbo. Glossip’s lawyer says politics may be driving the state’s actions. Supporters call him a political prisoner. Whatever the truth, his health deteriorates while the machinery of justice grinds slowly forward.
Across these stories runs one thread: judicial power is immense, but so is the responsibility to wield it carefully. Every lapse—whether in anger, conflict, or indecision—echoes far beyond a single courtroom. It touches the public’s trust in the very idea of justice.
Disclaimer: The news on Abusive Discretion is from the public record. Editorials and opinions are light-hearted opinions about very serious topics not stated as statements of fact but rather satirical and opinion based on the information that is linked above.
