The Louisiana Supreme Court has officially removed Judge Tiffany Foxworth-Roberts from her position, marking a significant move in a misconduct case that has garnered widespread attention. This decision is particularly notable as it represents the first removal of a judge by the state’s high court in 16 years. The court’s ruling, announced on October 5, 2023, followed a recommendation from the Louisiana Judiciary Commission, which found that Foxworth-Roberts had repeatedly lied about her military service and other matters.
Details of the Misconduct Case
According to the Judiciary Commission, Foxworth-Roberts misrepresented her military background during her campaign for judicial office. Advertisements claimed she served in Desert Storm and had achieved the rank of Army captain; however, records indicate she was only 16 years old at the time of the conflict and did not attain that rank. These discrepancies led to serious questions about her integrity and credibility.
In addition to the military misrepresentations, the commission investigated an insurance claim Foxworth-Roberts filed during her 2020 campaign. She reported that approximately $40,000 worth of jewelry and other goods were stolen from her car. However, police body camera footage contradicted her account, revealing inconsistencies regarding the location of the theft. Foxworth-Roberts claimed the incident occurred at her home, while she reported it to her insurer as happening miles away.
Supreme Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court’s decision to remove Foxworth-Roberts came after a narrow vote of 4-3. Chief Justice John Weimer expressed the court’s reluctance to remove an elected official but emphasized the necessity of maintaining public trust in the judicial system. He stated, “The lack of candor in the campaign… demonstrates removal from office is the only appropriate sanction.”
Justices Cade Cole, Jay McCallum, and Will Crain, who recently took a position on the federal bench, joined Weimer in supporting the removal. Conversely, Justices Piper Griffin, John Michael Guidry, and Jeff Hughes dissented, highlighting a division in the court regarding the severity of the actions taken against Foxworth-Roberts.
The Judiciary Commission’s investigation raised serious concerns about Foxworth-Roberts’ credibility. Retired Judge Melvin Zeno, who served as a hearing officer in her case, concluded that she had “little, if any credibility,” citing numerous false statements and attempts to obscure the truth.
During the oral arguments, Chief Justice Weimer remarked that the court could accept human errors but could not overlook outright dishonesty. The implications of this ruling extend beyond Foxworth-Roberts, serving as a reminder of the responsibilities and ethical standards expected from judges.
Foxworth-Roberts was elected to the bench in 2020, but the Judiciary Commission indicated that voters did not receive an accurate portrayal of her qualifications due to misleading statements made during her campaign. This case underscores the importance of transparency and integrity in public office.
This story is developing and will be updated as more information becomes available.
