I’ve had a few bad experiences with judges. That is to be expected for a trial lawyer. We are to be zealous advocates for our clients and zeal can lead to emotional involvement. My complaints have only been voiced in private and probably came off as sour grapes. When emotions subside I can rationalize what happened and move on. Or file an appeal.

The old joke goes, “What do you call a lawyer who graduated at the bottom of their class in law school? Your honor.” Lawyer jokes are bad for two reasons: lawyers don’t think they are funny and the laypeople doesn’t think they are jokes. I appreciate funny jokes, even if I am the butt of them and I often am. (Full disclosure, I didn’t graduate at the top of my class and the only robe I have is a terrycloth one borrowed from a Motel 6. I know I am doing life wrong.)

When it comes to judges, the standard is different and jokes have been replaced with blatant lies and slurs. They can’t defend themselves in public because of the very position being attacked. Only a bully attacks the defenseless. As I have said in these pages in the past, lawyers should step up to defend judges not just because we can, but because we must. I am renewing that call to action now.

The attacks on judges, even Article 3 judges, has increased. Recently a U.S. Senator called for impeachment of a judge whose opinions he didn’t like. That this senator is a lawyer makes the attack all the more despicable. The real goal is not only to intimidate the Bench but to undermine the rule of law as a whole.

Some criticism of judges stems from public ignorance of what judges do. I recently wrote a letter to the editor of my local paper after another reader attacked a judge for paroling a criminal who committed murder while he was free. I hope the person who wrote the letter was ignorant and didn’t know that judges don’t have a role in parole decisions. The judge in question certainly didn’t in that case. I am not sure if my letter changed his mind, but it did inject facts into the conversation.

Writing letters and speaking out in defense of the judicial system is a lawyer’s duty. From a cynical point of view it protects the whole profession by preserving the public’s faith in the rule of law. I try to limit my cynicism to television drug ads, and defending our legal system is critical, not cynical. Until legal ads require “may cause blindness or stomach discomfort” disclaimers, we are ahead of the drug companies at least. There are lawyers who have upset my stomach, but a warning would not have saved me.

I believe attacks on judges are trendy, not because they are warranted but because undermining the rule of law benefits those whose actions are the most suspect. Petty thugs don’t go on social media to insult judges, thugs who sit in the halls of power do. At best, lawyers who are complacent when this happens should be ashamed, if shame is still a thing. At worst, they are accomplices.

Albert Einstein said, “The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.” I understand that Mr. Einstein didn’t graduate at the top of his class either but he seems like a pretty bright fellow and lawyers would do well to listen to him.

©2026 With All Due Respect. Spencer Farris is the founding partner of The S.E. Farris Law Firm in St Louis, Missouri. He blames video games for his law school ranking. Comments or criticisms about this column may be sent c/o this publication or directly to him via email at farris@farrislaw.net.