A liberal Maryland Supreme Court Justice, Peter Killough, has found himself in hot water over a politically charged Halloween display on his lawn. The display, which includes politically charged messages, has raised questions about his ability to rule impartially in a high-stakes environmental case. The Maryland Supreme Court Justice, appointed by Democratic Governor Wes Moore, is now facing criticism for exhibiting his left-wing political leanings through the display.
The Halloween display, which includes an environmentalist sign, has sparked controversy, particularly since Killough is currently involved in a landmark climate liability case. The signs, painted on Halloween-style gravestones, depict messages such as ‘Here lies the Constitution.’ These signs have raised concerns about the impartiality of the judiciary, especially given the high stakes of the case.
Experts have raised concerns about the potential bias in Killough’s rulings, particularly regarding a high-stakes environmental case involving oil companies. The incident highlights growing concerns about judges’ personal commentary influencing their judicial decisions, further eroding public trust in the judiciary. The Maryland Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case on Oct. 6, with the case involving Baltimore politicians suing major oil companies for alleged misrepresentation about the role of fossil fuels in climate change.
While a spokesperson for the Maryland Judiciary stated that the signs belong to Killough’s wife, the controversy continues to draw criticism. Former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould expressed disappointment, stating that the signs indicate a clear bias on Killough’s part and raise serious questions about whether he should be involved in such a high-stakes climate case.
This is not the first time Killough has found himself in the headlines. In 2022, as a circuit court judge for Prince George’s County, he was reassigned away from handling juvenile cases after complaints from the county executive, chief of police, and council members who claimed he was letting serious juvenile offenders off. One particularly egregious case involved the release of a 12-year-old who admitted to shooting and killing another teen, with the victim’s mother expressing shock at the ruling.
Despite the backlash, the controversy continues to highlight the growing concerns about the impartiality of judges, especially in politically charged cases. The incident has further fueled public distrust in the judiciary, with experts warning that such events indicate a troubling trend in the judicial system.