US Federal Judge Accused of Pro-Israel Bias and Judicial Misconduct

A United States federal judge is confronting a formal complaint regarding anti-Palestinian remarks and alleged ties to Islamophobic organizations, raising significant alarms about potential pro-Israel bias within the judicial system.

Florida attorney Katherine Giannamore submitted the judicial misconduct complaint against District Judge Roy Altman earlier this month, alleging that he has diminished “public confidence in the integrity, impartiality, and independence of the federal judiciary.”

Filed with the Eleventh Circuit Court, the complaint further alleges that Altman leveraged judicial resources to advance Israel, including making media appearances from his Miami chambers.

“Since at least April 2026, Judge Altman has persistently engaged in this conduct during business hours, broadcasting himself live from his chambers and utilizing law clerks during public speaking engagements,” the complaint states.

“These activities have been continuous, occurring almost daily over the span of several months.”

‘The terrorism scarf’

The complaint highlights several instances of behavior deemed deeply troubling.

In April, for example, Judge Altman appeared on a podcast hosted by the Middle East Forum, a right-wing organization whose stated mission is to combat “the infrastructure of lawful Islamism.” During the interview, he referred to the keffiyeh, a symbol of Palestinian identity, as a “terrorism scarf.”

In an interview with Al Jazeera, Giannamore cited such comments as a primary reason for concern.

“This blatant use of the judicial office for personal political aspirations or beliefs undermines the judiciary. It damages public perception regarding the legitimacy of the courts,” Giannamore stated.

While acknowledging that the complaint is unlikely to result in a formal reprimand for Altman, she emphasized the importance of raising the issue.

Federal judges serve for life. Misconduct complaints are directed to the chief judge of the relevant court of appeals, who may either dismiss them or appoint a special committee to investigate the allegations.

In rare instances, these complaints can lead to sanctions, such as suspending a judge’s case assignments or requesting their voluntary resignation.

Giannamore believes that complaints like hers can stimulate a necessary discussion about acceptable conduct within the judicial system, particularly for those holding lifelong appointments.

“It is crucial to bring awareness to this and perhaps prompt them to reflect, ‘Is this worth it? Is this something we accept? And would we accept it if a judge were using the office to speak on other issues?'” Giannamore said.

Altman, a staunch Israel supporter appointed by President Donald Trump in 2019, is currently promoting a self-published book defending the US ally.

During his April remarks with the Middle East Forum, he explained that he had been touring college campuses and churches to refute accusations of rights violations against Israel, which is engaged in a genocidal war on Gaza.

The judge frequently uses the terms “Jews” and “Israel” interchangeably during his speeches.

“I tell college campuses, ‘You think you’re counterculture? You think you’re cool and unique because you wear the terrorism scarf, the keffiyeh, and you chant against the Jews? Get in line, get a ticket. You’re the most mainstream, boring thing history has ever seen,'” Altman said.

This was one of several instances in which the judge demonized the symbol of Palestinian nationalism.

“At Yale Law School, where I graduated in 2007, I never once saw a single person wearing a keffiyeh,” he stated in a recent podcast.

“This tells you that at one of the most liberal law schools on the planet, no student thought it was appropriate to wear a scarf that symbolizes terrorism and the violent deaths of thousands of innocent Jews.”

Altman is also a prolific social media user whose posts primarily focus on Israel, and he frequently appears on podcasts and YouTube clips.

In one interview, he declared that “there is no distinction” between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism.

The judge’s pro-Israel advocacy occasionally extends into comments that appear hostile toward Arabs and Muslims.

“The real geo-strategic conflict here isn’t seven million Jews against six million Palestinians,” he said in June.

“It is seven million Jews surrounded by two billion Muslims—hundreds of millions of whom have been raised to believe that divine providence requires them to devote their lives to the destruction of that tiny Jewish state.”

The judge did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment prior to publication.

Israel trips

It is highly unusual for a judge to be so vocal about a divisive political issue.

Altman’s advocacy coincides with a period in which the federal judiciary is reviewing several cases related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including Trump’s efforts to deport student activists who protested the war on Gaza.

Altman frequently promotes a travel program by the World Jewish Congress that takes fellow judges on trips to Israel—visits similar to the junkets the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) provides to members of Congress.

“One of the reasons our judges in America give for why trips to Israel are so profoundly transformative is that, in Israel, you can feel our joint Judeo-Christian heritage, our history, our home,” he wrote in a social media post earlier this month.

According to Giannamore’s complaint, Altman stated during a speech at Florida International University that he has taken 10 percent of the federal judiciary on such trips.

The complaint stated that such a large number of judges “coming away from foreign state-sponsored trips, where they meet with foreign political officials, is truly frightening.” It noted that some of these judges may preside over cases related to Israel.

Giannamore suggested that possible bias acquired from the “propaganda” visits to Israel might extend beyond conflict-related issues to cases involving Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims more broadly.

“It extends into biases that they at least can be perceived to hold regarding Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, and peace advocates,” she said.

“So if you’re taking 10 percent of the judiciary right now and they’re spread all across the country, that’s a huge number, and I think it ultimately undermines public confidence in one of our branches of government. It’s really bad for everyone.”

Source link