That is 0 articles you have read today.
The Aporia is free and carries no advertising, so readers are the only
thing paying for it. If you are getting this much out of it, a small
donation is what keeps it independent.
Daily limit reached
You have read 0 articles today.
That is more than the 15 a day The Aporia gives away,
and well past what it can carry on nothing. Your allowance resets at
midnight.
There is no advertising here and nothing about you is sold, so readers
are the only thing paying for it. If the site is worth this much of
your day, it is worth a few dollars.
Everything else stays open: the
maps, the
directory and
search do
not count against this, and neither does re-opening something you have
already read today.
The Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal from former Pennsylvania Judge Mark Cohen who was suspended after making numerous politically charged posts on Facebook while serving on the bench. These posts included praise for President Joe Biden and support for Democratic policies such as higher minimum wage laws and abortion rights. The Judicial Conduct Board argued that Cohen’s social media activity amounted to "partisan cheerleading," leading Pennsylvania’s highest court to conclude that his volume and tone made him seem like a partisan advocate, resulting in his suspension from the bench.
Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-10-07,
using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the
same event (that is the story summary below).
Story summary
In November 2021, Mark Cohen, a former Pennsylvania judge and Democratic state lawmaker, was suspended from the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas after making dozens of politically charged Facebook posts while on the bench. Despite warnings to stop, Cohen continued to post content praising then-President Joe Biden and his policies, including promoting the Build Back Better legislation. In April 2023, Cohen appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that his suspension violated his First Amendment rights. However, in May 2023, the Supreme Court declined to hear his case without comment. The Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board argued that Cohen’s suspension was justified under established rules and did not require Supreme Court intervention.
Written for “Supreme Court Ruling On Judge Bias” on 2026-10-07,
grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.
Why this leaning score
The article's own words the score was based on. Each is quoted
verbatim and was checked against the article text before being
stored, so you can find it in the original.
Leaning: leans right for article 63072 (high confidence, 1 verified quote) · logged 2026-10-07
Claims extracted
14
claim-shaped sentences
Uncertain
0%
0 of 14 hedged
Leaning
Leans right
of the writing, not the subject · beta estimate
Correction & hedging signals
68.6
corrections and hedging in what we collected;
not a measure of accuracy
Outlets on this story
1
Politics
Narrative spread
1
articles carrying this framing
The Supreme Court declined Monday to hear an appeal from a former Pennsylvania judge who was suspended after repeatedly posting partisan political content on Facebook, including praise for former President Joe Biden and his policies.
asserted
who → decline → Biden
Former Judge Mark Cohen, a former Democratic state lawmaker who began serving on the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas in 2018, made dozens of politically charged Facebook posts while on the bench, even after being warned to stop.
asserted
who → begin → bench
Cohen appealed to the Supreme Court in April, with his lawyers arguing that the former judge’s First Amendment rights had been violated.
asserted
rights → appeal → April
"Allowing judges to be disciplined based on the perceived ‘tone’ or ‘volume’ of lawful speech promotes arbitrary enforcement, invites political interference in the judicial branch, and threatens to undermine the rule of law," Cohen’s lawyer told Law.com at the time.
asserted
lawyer → allow → time
"This case presents an urgent opportunity for the court to restore constitutional clarity and reestablish the First Amendment’s protection of the rights of sitting judges to speak on matters of public concern.
asserted
court → present → concern
The Supreme Court declined to take up Cohen’s case, denying his petition without comment.
asserted
Court → decline → comment
Pennsylvania’s Judicial Conduct Board argued that the Supreme Court did not need to hear Cohen’s appeal because his social media activity amounted to "partisan cheerleading" and his suspension reflected a "straightforward application of familiar rules that judges around the country have followed for decades."
asserted
judges → argue → decades
Pennsylvania’s highest court concluded that the volume and tone of Cohen’s posts made him appear to be an advocate for the Democratic Party.
asserted
him → conclude → Party
In November 2021, Cohen promoted Biden’s Build Back Better legislation, saying its passage would improve "many, many American lives."
asserted
passage → promote → lives
A year later, on Biden’s birthday, Cohen called him "an excellent President" and said he looked forward to "many more achievements."
asserted
he → call → achievements
Cohen also made posts taking specific policy positions, including one in favor of higher minimum wage laws and another against restrictions on elective abortions.
asserted
Cohen → make → abortions
Cohen also highlighted his record on gun policy, including a post noting that he had consistently received an "F" rating from the National Rifle Association while serving in the state legislature.
asserted
he → highlight → legislature
Cohen’s Supreme Court petition says the suspension also triggered the forfeiture of his judicial and prior public-service pensions.
asserted
suspension → say → pensions
DLA Piper, the law firm representing Cohen, did not respond Wednesday to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.
asserted
Piper → represent → comment
The Aporia
