New Jersey Judge Faces Removal Over Threats to Deport Immigrant Families During Truancy Hearings

The Supreme Court of New Jersey Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct has recommended the removal from office of Britt J. Simon, a county judge who made inflammatory threats during truancy hearings in Bound Brook Municipal Court. In February 2025, Simon was suspended for comments he made that were deemed "horribly unpleasant" and threatening towards families with undocumented status. The committee's recent decision stems from Simon's repeated use of aggressive language and threats to involve Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) during court proceedings involving truant students.

During hearings spanning August 2024 to January 2025, Simon made several alarming statements that targeted minors and their families, including one instance where he told a 16-year-old boy to "look at your mother" before threatening her deportation. He also warned another student, aged 14, that missing school could result in immediate ICE intervention. These actions were part of an ongoing pattern of behavior that the committee found violated judicial ethical standards and compromised Simon's integrity.

In his defense, Simon claimed he was attempting to address a lack of compliance with truancy laws but admitted to using strong rhetoric and empty threats as a form of discipline. His email correspondence revealed frustration over ineffective methods to curb absenteeism among students, suggesting that harsher measures were necessary despite the ethical implications. The committee's decision highlights the severity of Simon's actions and their potential impact on immigrant families' rights and well-being.

The majority opinion emphasized that Simon's conduct undermined public trust in judicial impartiality and integrity. While a minority suggested less severe penalties such as public censure or continued suspension, the committee concluded that removal from office was warranted given the egregious nature of his violations and lack of remorse for his actions. This case underscores ongoing debates about appropriate disciplinary measures for judges who breach ethical standards, particularly those involving vulnerable immigrant communities.