Complaint: Endorsements
January 15, 2025
The Commission on Judicial Conduct
61 Broadway, Suite 1200
New York, New York 10006
CJC@cjc.ny.gov
We respectfully submit this complaint concerning Judge Kathleen Waterman Marshall in light of Opinion 19-87. This opinion mandates that judges may not provide endorsements because “such conduct is ethically impermissible, as it could lend the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of others.” The opinion further confirms that it does not matter if the review was anonymous, made no reference to the judge’s status or whether the actions were promotional or critical.
The endorsements of her wedding planner are open to the general public. These have been viewed almost 1,000 times.
We understand that details of Judge Waterman’s alleged endorsements were provided to the CJC in October 2023. Despite this, these endorsements remain online today. Moreover, in October 2023, Judge Waterman was asked to “disclose the circumstances including any compensation arrangements from your public endorsements of your wedding vendors.” Judge Waterman did not respond.
During the one-minute video testimonial, Judge Waterman enthusiastically declares her wedding was the “wedding of the century” and claimed her planner “was out of this world!” She concludes her testimonial by emphatically directing the public to “get them [her wedding planner] for your wedding!” Judge Waterman, via her Instagram profile “augustinbklyn,” also left a written endorsement, enthusiastically stating, “Thanks again Charlie!!! It was magic!!! Perfect!!!”
The links to the endorsements are below; the Facebook “views” does not seem to count views made by general public.
Instagram: Wedding video testimonial from this evening’s wedding
Facebook: Wedding video testimonial from this evening’s wedding
It is concerning that after these details were provided to the CJC and Judge Waterman, the Instagram profile picture for “augustinbklyn” was changed from one showing the judge to a generic image. The Instagram page is private, so it is unclear what other endorsements, comments or alleged improper social media activity may have occurred.
Further concerning is that Judge Waterman’s LinkedIn page was subsequently deleted. This has further obscured examination into what other endorsements, comments or alleged improper social media activity may have occurred on that platform.
We respectfully request access to the disciplinary process related to this complaint. We reserve all rights, especially those afforded under the First Amendment, regarding this complaint.
Respectfully submitted,
The Litigants of Waterman Watch
cc:
Hon. Brad Hoylman-Sigal, Senator
Hon. Charles Lavine, Assemblymember