CJP to Conduct Hearing on Charges Against Judge Draper Prior to June 2 Election

Friday, April 3, 2026

Page 1

CJP to Conduct Hearing on Charges Against Judge Draper Prior to June 2 Election

By a MetNews Staff Writer

The Commission on Judicial Performance yesterday announced it will hold a public hearing on April 27 on charges that Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert S. Draper should be disciplined for multiple violations of ethical canons.

A Jan. 6 notice to the judge of formal proceedings sets forth that “[i]n the alternative, your conduct constitutes evidence of a disability that seriously interferes with the performance of your duties and is, or is likely to become, permanent,” signaling the prospect of an involuntary disability retirement.

What emerges at the hearing could have an impact on Draper’s chances of reelection on June 2. He is facing a challenge by Deputy District Attorney Tal K. Valbuena.

A recommendation by special masters and action on their report by the commission would not likely come before the election. Should the commission vote to remove the judge based on misconduct or place him on a disability retirement, he could seek review in the California Supreme Court.

‘Extreme and Bizarre’

The notice contains seven counts. One relates to racial remarks he made in a case, leading to Div. Eight of this district’s Court of Appeal, on April 7, 2025, reversing a $10 million judgment. Then-Justice Elizabeth A. Grimes (now retired) termed his comments “extreme and bizarre,” writing:

“[W]hile we do not know whether, as defendants contend, Judge Draper’s ‘persistent racial and gender bias’ motivated his rulings at trial, we cannot rule out that possibility….We need not decide whether bias was the reason for his arbitrary and capricious evidentiary rulings; the rulings were an abuse of discretion irrespective of his motivations. One thing we can say for sure is, the rulings were not motivated by a devotion to the law of evidence.”

In his answer to the charges, Draper said the Court of Appeal’s opinion in the case, Odom v. Los Angeles Community College District, takes “wholly out of context” the dialogue that took place “and does not accurately depict the nature of the conversation.”

Response to Charges

He declared:

“[M]y appointment by Governor Edmund G. (‘Jerry’) Brown, Jr. to the Los Angeles County Superior Court on December 31, 2012, was the greatest honor of my, at that point, 44-year professional career. For the last 14 years since then, I have been and continue to be honored to serve as a Judge on the Los Angeles County Superior Court. After I was appointed by Governor Brown, I was reelected twice for successive 6-year terms. I now have the privilege of standing for one last 6-year term, and I intend to do so, because I have not been able to complete the changes in how our Court operates that I believe are necessary to effectively serve the people of Los Angeles County.”

He maintained that the charges are “based on statements and/or allegations of conduct that the staff of the Commission for Judicial Performance knew at the time they publicly filed these charges was contrary to all credible evidence and/or taken wholly out of context,” adding:

“ I…look forward to a public proceeding out of the darkness with room for all to attend who wish to do so in which the truth can be publicly determined and made known.”