FindLaw's Marci Hamilton writes:
Are the judge's constitutional rights violated by the requirement that he wear an unadorned robe? Of course not. He can express his message - and worship as he chooses - on his own time, wearing his off-duty clothing. Neither his Free Exercise rights, nor his Free Speech rights are infringed by that distinction. All that is asked is that he refrain from using his public position to foster his personal views. As in the case of the porn-selling police officer, the point is that public office and personal speech and religion should not mix.
Meanwhile, the Andalusia Star-News found general support for Judge McKathan's new wardrobe.
Elizabeth Shine, also of Andalusia, has no problem with the Pleasant Home native's judicial robe, and the fact that it is emblazoned with Old Testament scriptural verses.
"It's his robe," Shine commented. "So, if it's the way he feels, he should have every right to put it on his robe."
Of course, he represents much more than himself when he dons that robe.
