An Above the Law column takes aim at critics who focus on the clothing of judges appointed by former President Trump. The piece frames the courtroom as a stage and these judges as actors in a performance, but argues that obsessing over their wardrobe is an exercise in triviality. The author's tone suggests that those engaging in such commentary are missing the point of what happens in court.
The column specifically calls out the 'fashion police' for having too much time on their hands. Rather than evaluating rulings or legal reasoning, this line of criticism fixates on personal presentation. The author implies that this is a shallow way to engage with the judiciary, and one that distracts from the more meaningful assessment of how judges actually do their jobs.
While the piece is clearly opinionated, it makes a simple argument: judicial worth should be measured by decisions, not by attire. The theatrical metaphor reinforces that judges are there to play a role in the legal system, not to serve as style icons. For those looking to critique Trump-appointed judges, the column suggests there are better targets than their suits or robes.