The Facebook posts called Joe Biden “an excellent president,” cheered on Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and backed Larry Krasner, the district attorney who serves as Philadelphia’s top prosecutor. The page they sat on showed the author in his black robes and named him as a sitting judge.
That judge was Mark B. Cohen of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, the county trial court in Pennsylvania. Judges there are barred from politicking, and his page tied every post to the bench. It cost him his seat and his pay, and the United States Supreme Court has now refused to step in.
Story Highlights
- On Monday, October 5, the United States Supreme Court declined to hear Mark B. Cohen’s appeal, so the ruling against him stands.
- Cohen’s public Facebook page identified him as a sitting judge and showed him in his robes.
- His posts praised Joe Biden, backed Gov. Josh Shapiro and District Attorney Larry Krasner, and criticized Republicans and the National Rifle Association.
- Pennsylvania suspended him without pay on October 7, 2024, through the end of his term.
What the Judge Posted
Cohen was a Democrat who served more than 40 years in the Pennsylvania House before he won a judge’s seat in 2018. He sat in the Family Division, which handles cases such as custody and support. He opened the Facebook page back when he was a lawmaker, and he kept posting on it after he put on the robe.
Supreme Court declines to reinstate Pennsylvania judge suspended for partisan Facebook posts https://t.co/JMnaSwRsRe
— Ncnovembergrl ♐🇺🇲🇮🇱🐻🐎🐕🎠🏇✝️ (@ncnovembergrl) October 6, 2026
Dozens of posts ended up in the case. Along with the praise for Biden, Shapiro and Krasner, they pushed policy goals such as a higher minimum wage and took aim at Republicans and the National Rifle Association. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court later wrote that the robe photos and the text naming his office left no chance that readers would miss the link between the opinions and the judge.
Cohen did not see a problem. He described the people who complained as “conservative people who want judges to be scared of their own shadow and completely silent on issues of societal improvements and social justice.”
How Pennsylvania Punished Him
The Judicial Conduct Board of Pennsylvania, the state body that investigates complaints against judges and brings charges, filed the case. It called the posts “partisan cheerleading.” The charges went to the Court of Judicial Discipline, a separate state court that hears those cases and decides the penalty.
On October 7, 2024, that court suspended Cohen without pay through the end of his term. It noted that no other case in its history involved the kind of defiance he showed after a decision. Pennsylvania law then required him to retire on December 31, 2024, because he had reached 75, the age limit for judges in the state.
Cohen appealed. In January 2026 the Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld the suspension, with six of the seven justices agreeing. Justice Kevin Dougherty wrote the opinion.
“Here, we hold the Commonwealth’s interests in preserving the judiciary’s reputation for impartiality outweighed Judge Cohen’s interests, as a sitting judge who was not a candidate for judicial office, in publicly advocating for the Democratic Party on Facebook and espousing his partisan political views,” Dougherty wrote.
What the Supreme Court Did
Cohen’s lawyers then asked the United States Supreme Court to rule that the First Amendment, which protects free speech, covered the posts he made while on the bench. They told the justices that the Court’s “guidance is sorely needed” and warned that the ruling would chill what judges feel free to say.
The justices declined to hear the case and gave no comment. When the Court declines to hear a case, it does not rule on who was right. The lower ruling simply stands. Here that means the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision is the last word, and Cohen has no further appeal.
What It Means for People Who Go to Court
The rule that stays in place is a plain one. A Pennsylvania judge may vote and may hold private views. A judge may not use a page that shows the robe to praise politicians and push one party’s agenda.
That matters to anyone who walks into a courtroom. A parent in a custody fight or a defendant facing a charge needs to trust that the person on the bench is not playing for a team. Cohen’s case shows that a judge who breaks that trust in public can lose the job and the paycheck, and that the nation’s highest court will let that penalty stand.
Sources:
inquirer.com, thehill.com, ground.news