ORLANDO, Fla. – A Central Florida judge is facing a public reprimand after court records show he asked a Black defendant during a plea hearing whether she had ever “chopped cotton” — and separately told two defense attorneys to “shut up” during a jury selection proceeding.
The Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) filed documents March 26 in the Florida Supreme Court recommending a public reprimand for Ninth Circuit Judge John Jordan, who serves in Orange and Osceola counties.
Jordan has agreed to the reprimand and admitted his conduct violated the state’s Code of Judicial Conduct.
[WATCH: Seminole County judge suspended by Florida Supreme Court (from 2025)]
Jordan presided over a July 2025 plea hearing involving a 33-year-old Black female defendant in a felony battery case who was eligible to complete 30 hours of community service.
While discussing how to fulfill that requirement, Jordan turned to the defendant and her great-uncle, who is also Black, according to the records.
“(Do) you own any land where I could have her work it for 30 hours?” Jordan asked, according to the transcript included in the JQC’s findings.
After the great-uncle laughed, Jordan continued.
“All my family’s farming. They’d love me out there,” Jordan said, according to the records. “You ever chopped cotton before? You know what that is? You take a hoe and you knock out the weeds. That’ll straighten you up real quick doing that stuff.”
Jordan later told the JQC panel that he comes from a farming background and spent summers as a youth working his relatives’ farm fields in Texas.
The circuit court judge said this was the first and only time he had ever inquired whether a defendant had “chopped cotton.”
Jordan claimed he failed to consider how his comments could be interpreted in light of the historically demeaning stereotype associating Black people with picking cotton, records show.
To demonstrate that he has a well-respected reputation in the Black community, Jordan submitted to the JQC investigative panel letters of commendation, awards, and a 2011 invitation to join the law advisory committee at Florida A&M University, a historically black college or university (HBCU).
“Judge Jordan insists that he is not a racist and does not make rulings or decisions improperly based on race, and the Commission has no evidence that such occurred,” the JQC report states. “If the Commission had such evidence, then the Commission would be making a far different recommendation of far more severe sanctions, up to and including removal from office.
In a separate incident in April 2025, Jordan reportedly became impatient with two public defenders during jury selection for an aggravated battery case
“How much time do you need? Can I get you something to eat? Something to drink?” Jordan sarcastically asked, according to the transcripts.
When the defenders complained they were being rushed and treated unfairly, Jordan — in a raised voice captured on the trial’s audio recording — ordered them to be quiet three times.
“Shut up,” Jordan said.
“That is rude,” responded one of the public defenders.
“Shut up,” Jordan repeated.
“No. That is very rude,” the public defender replied.
“Shut up. I’m not going to listen to two people arguing. I’ll listen to one. Okay?” Jordan responded, according to the records.
One of the public defenders subsequently moved for a mistrial and sought to have Jordan disqualified, citing his behavior. Jordan immediately denied both motions.
The confrontation continued when the public defender described Jordan’s unprofessional tone on the record later that day.
“Okay. So, your sarcastic remark is noted. And that’s not how it went down, but I understand what is going on. I’m declaring a mistrial and we’ll get another judge for you,” Jordan said, according to the documents.
“No. I’m done. I’m not going to deal with this pettiness like this,” he added, ending the proceedings.
Jordan and the JQC have agreed to a public reprimand for his violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct, records show.
The stipulation must still be approved by the Florida Supreme Court.
“The Commission believes that this sanction will serve to deter Judge Jordan’s misconduct in the future and serve as an example and reminder to the judiciary about the high standard of courtroom decorum and behavior expected of judges,” the JQC findings state.