Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Robert Draper, an 84‑year‑old appointed by former Governor Jerry Brown, is running for another term even as the California Commission on Judicial Performance has filed seven ethics charges against him. The allegations, stemming from courtroom comments in 2022 and 2023, will be weighed by voters in the upcoming primary.

Seven Specific Ethics Violations Filed by the State Commission

The California Commission on Judicial Performance alleges that Judge Draper engaged in willful misconduct,failed to perform his duties, and harmed the court’s reputation. Specific counts include describing a juror’s skin tone as “coal black” and “light brown ,” recounting a vulgar anecdote about male attorneys and female secretaries, and calling women in the courthouse “cute” and “attractive .” According to the commission’s filing, these remarks violate the state’s judicial conduct rules.

Impact of Parkinson’s and Personal Loss on Draper’s Conduct

Judge Draper, who disclosed a Parkinson’s diagnosis and the recent death of his son, argues that his health challenges and grief may have influenced his behavior.. He maintains that the controversial statements were taken out of context and were not intended to be biased. The judge’s defense highlights a broader debate about how personal circumstances intersect with judicial responsibilities.

Deputy District Attorney Makes Ethics Charges Central to Campaign

In the primary, Draper’s opponent—a deputy district attorney—has turned the ethics allegations into a focal point of his campaign,urging voters to consider the judge’s conduct. As reported by the source, the challenger frames the charges as evidence of a pattern of inappropriate behavior that could erode public confidence in the legal system .

Restrictions on Draper’s Judicial Duties Pending Investigation

Since returning from leave, Judge Draper has been limited to chambers work, barred from using a computer or staff, and has not presided over any cases. A six‑day hearing with special masters concluded earlier this month, and their report is expected within weeks, though a final disciplinary decision will not be issued until after the primary.

What Remains Unclear About the Final Outcome?

Key unanswered points include whether the commission will recommend removal or a lesser sanction, and how the pending special‑master report will influence the voters’ decision. The source notes that the proceedings are civil, not criminal, but the potential penalties range up to removal from the bench.