Nineteen people left her court. She signed a deal admitting misconduct, and a nine-member panel still recommended her removal.
Then nine justices read the same record and said no.

Tracy Flood was elected in 2021 as the first woman and the first Black judge in Bremerton, Washington, and she was the only judge on the city's court. In October 2024 she faced a four-day public disciplinary hearing over how she treated her staff and lawyers, and how her court was run. She joined the first morning eleven minutes late, by video. That same morning she signed a stipulation admitting three violations of the judicial code, and in return the prosecutor promised not to recommend removal.

Over the next three hearing days, the panel heard from two veteran court administrators who had come to help, a probation officer of 22 years, the court's current administrator and the city prosecutor. A defense witness described an "anti-Judge Flood movement" in the courthouse, and her lawyers argued that much of the criticism was tone policing of a Black woman. A recording of a 2022 hearing was played. Then the judge took the stand and was asked whether she believed what she had signed, and why she smiled when the prosecutor asked her about a witness breaking into tears.

In January 2025, the panel unanimously censured her and recommended that the state Supreme Court remove her from office, something neither side had asked for. The recommendation alone took her off the bench, with pay. In December 2025, the Supreme Court upheld all four violations but rejected removal 9–0, and by an 8–1 vote ordered censure and a 30-day suspension without pay. It credited testimony suggesting bias against her from some staff and attorneys, and still held that, as presiding judge, she fell short. By then she had not run for reelection, and voters had already chosen her successor: the man she defeated in 2021.

This video follows the hearing day by day, from the late start to the decision the panel read aloud, and ends with four questions: what the deal promised, who can remove a judge, why the Supreme Court said no, and whether race played a role.
Nine people watched her for four days and saw no capacity to change. Nine justices read the same record and saw a judge who could improve. Who read her right? Tell us in the comments.

CHAPTERS
0:00 "Why did you smile?"
0:33 Recommended for removal, then a 9–0 no
1:01 Day one: eleven minutes late
2:17 The charges and a one-line denial
2:35 "I have not seen a final version"
3:14 The deal: three violations admitted
3:52 "Still on the table"
5:01 The panel accepts the deal
5:54 Day two: "tone policing"
6:47 The administrator who came to help
7:41 "That was not a teaching moment"
9:41 She came looking for bias
11:14 "Tiny but significant"
11:55 The city prosecutor and stalled warrants
13:17 A hearing from December 2022
14:04 Day three: the probation officer
15:34 "She needs to get shut down"
16:03 "Everything gets back to me"
17:23 "I misspoke"
17:37 The tape: who gets to cancel a jury
18:55 "An anti-Judge Flood movement"
19:42 "The closest thing I've seen to justice"
20:36 Day four: the judge takes the stand
21:10 "I didn't break it"
21:23 That Monday morning: when did she log in?
21:49 "I want to accept responsibility"
22:20 The sound a witness described
23:09 "Condescending": the deal on screen
24:14 Back to the smile
25:21 A letter from 2021
25:48 "Have you changed?"
27:21 Closing arguments
28:28 What each side asked for
29:04 84 days later: the panel's decision
29:38 "Neither explains nor excuses"
30:46 "No basis to believe" she can change
31:16 Censured, with a recommendation
31:58 Why the Supreme Court said no: four questions
32:31 Who can remove a judge?
32:55 The bar for removal
33:21 The panel's own words
34:14 Was it race?
34:39 December 2025: 9–0 and 8–1
35:12 The man she beat in 2021
35:39 Who read her right?

#JudicialMisconduct #CourtroomFootage #TracyFlood #Bremerton #WashingtonState #DisciplinaryHearing #LegalBreakdown