SCOTUS slams door on Dem judge’s career fight after years of pro-Biden Facebook posts, tell me about this news today

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from former Pennsylvania judge Mark B. Cohen, ending his legal challenge against judicial disciplinary actions stemming from his partisan Facebook posts.

Law Commentary

Who Is Involved Mark B. Cohen served for over four decades as a Democratic member of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives before being elected as a judge on the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas.

The Controversy While serving on the bench, Cohen maintained an active presence on his personal Facebook page. Despite repeated warnings from judicial ethics authorities, he regularly posted content supporting Democratic figures and policies:

Facebook

• Praising President Joe Biden as an “excellent president”.

  The Gateway Pundit

• Promoting Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro and progressive Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner.

  The Gateway Pundit

• Criticizing prominent Republicans, legislative spending priorities, and organizations like the NRA.

  The Gateway Pundit

Pennsylvania’s Judicial Conduct Board determined that Cohen’s commentary amounted to overt partisan advocacy and breached the Pennsylvania Code of Judicial Conduct, which prohibits sitting judges from engaging in partisan political activity to maintain public confidence and judicial impartiality.

The Legal Fight In 2024, the Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline suspended Cohen without pay through the end of his term, leading up to his mandatory retirement at age 75.

The Gateway Pundit

Cohen appealed the sanction, arguing that the disciplinary rules infringed upon his First Amendment right to free speech on matters of public interest. However, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld the disciplinary action, ruling that the state has a compelling interest in ensuring judges appear nonpartisan and unbiased, which outweighs an individual judge’s off-bench political commentary.

The Supreme Court’s Decision Cohen petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene, seeking a definitive ruling on whether strict First Amendment scrutiny protects sitting judges making partisan political statements online.

The Supreme Court denied his petition for certiorari without comment. This refusal leaves the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision intact, affirming that states retain broad regulatory power to penalize judges who violate nonpartisan conduct rules on social media.