Judges’ use of humor as a social corrective

Although judging is serious business, the occasional humorous opinion is a longstanding tradition among both British and American judges. In the United States, humorous judicial opinions are frequently used by newspapers as filler articles, and numerous collections appear in books and on Internet websites, to the apparent delight of popular and professional audiences alike. However, despite a widespread absence of public disapprobation, some commentators have criticized judicial humor as inappropriate, arguing that a judge's role is not to entertain, and that an opinion that ridicules a litigant or his case violates standards of judicial decorum and impartiality. This article challenges the view that a judge's use of humor is necessarily injudicious, and argues that judges use humor as a social corrective to sanction wrongdoers and to deter others from engaging in similar conduct. Through an analysis of actual judicial opinions, I demonstrate how this is achieved.