Broward judge denies violating judicial conduct code over deepfake AI call
Broward County Judge Lauren Peffer in a new court filing Friday formally denied the ethics charges filed against her, stemming from her promotion of a scandalous book and a deepfake AI recording during her campaign last year.
In the routine filing with Florida's Supreme Court, Peffer denied the Judicial Qualifications Commission's charges filed last month that she violated judicial ethics rules that govern 'inappropriate political activity.'
Peffer, a first-time judicial candidate, won her seat in August and began her term in January. During her campaign, which centered on trustworthiness and ethics in the judiciary, Peffer referenced in an endorsement interview with the South Florida Sun Sentinel editorial board a book written and published by a former courthouse employee in the Orlando area called, 'The Ninth Circus Court of Florida, My 30-Year Job from Hell!'
The book, written by someone who had been terminated, 'portrays the judiciary in the Ninth Judicial Circuit as corrupt and incompetent and attacks the character' of numerous judges, including current Chief Judge Lisa Munyon, according to the JQC's charging document.
Peffer wrote in response to a Sun Sentinel editorial board questionnaire that the book's 'recent revelations' had 'highlighted an image crisis within Florida's judiciary,' according to the JQC's notice of formal charges.
At the time Peffer cited the book in the Sun Sentinel interview, it lacked any published reviews and appeared to have generated no public discourse or impact, the Sun Sentinel previously reported. Asked by the Sun Sentinel about evidence of the book creating public mistrust, Peffer sent the newspaper a link to an 18-minute recording of what purported to be a phone call about the book between Munyon, state Supreme Court Chief Justice Carlos Muñiz and Justice Renatha Francis, according to the notice of charges.
But the recording was fake, likely made with generative AI, and could be deemed so by 'any reasonable person,' the JQC said in its notice of charges.
Broward judicial candidate drops Orlando author's self-published tell-all from her campaign stump speech
Peffer was forwarded the link to the recording 'by another lawyer,' her response filed Friday said.
Peffer in her response to the charges on Friday acknowledged that she had not 'carefully listened to the call but had a recollection that the judiciary was being criticized in the recording' and did not try to determine its veracity before providing it to the newspaper.
'Judge Peffer acknowledges that she should have more carefully listened to the recording before referencing it in her answers to the editorial board. In responding to these proceedings, Judge Peffer listened to the recordings without distraction, and it was immediately apparent that the purported phone call was a 'deep fake,'' her response said.
However, she denied that she shared the recording 'despite clear evidence of its inauthenticity,' as the JQC alleged in its charges.
In her response, Peffer also admitted that she never read the disgruntled employee's book before referencing it to the Sun Sentinel and did not research the claims the employee made.
'Judge Peffer did not intend to promote the validity of the book but instead, she intended to point to the book as an example of criticism of the judiciary,' her response said.
She previously acknowledged issues with the book in a July interview with the Sun Sentinel and said she would stop citing it.
Peffer denied that she 'ignored' the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee's training on campaign ethics as the notice of charges alleged and denied that she 'helped facilitate the former employee's farce,' according to her response.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
What's left for the Supreme Court to decide? 21 cases, including state bans on transgender care
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is in the homestretch of a term that has lately been dominated by the Trump administration's emergency appeals of lower court orders seeking to slow President Donald Trump's efforts to remake the federal government. But the justices also have 21 cases to resolve that were argued between December and mid-May, including a push by Republican-led states to ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors. One of the argued cases was an emergency appeal, the administration's bid to be allowed to enforce Trump's executive order denying birthright citizenship to U.S.-born children of parents who are in the country illegally. The court typically aims to finish its work by the end of June. Here are some of the biggest remaining cases: Tennessee and 26 other states have enacted bans on certain treatment for transgender youth The oldest unresolved case, and arguably the term's biggest, stems from a challenge to Tennessee's law from transgender minors and their parents who argue that it is unconstitutional sex discrimination aimed at a vulnerable population. At arguments in December, the court's conservative majority seemed inclined to uphold the law, voicing skepticism of claims that it violates the 14th amendment's equal protection clause. The post-Civil War provision requires the government to treat similarly situated people the same. The court is weighing the case amid a range of other federal and state efforts to regulate the lives of transgender people, including which sports competitions they can join and which bathrooms they can use. In April, Trump's administration sued Maine for not complying with the government's push to ban transgender athletes in girls sports. Trump also has sought to block federal spending on gender-affirming care for those under 19 and a conservative majority of justices allowed him to move forward with plans to oust transgender people from the U.S. military. Trump's birthright citizenship order has been blocked by lower courts The court rarely hears arguments over emergency appeals, but it took up the administration's plea to narrow orders that have prevented the citizenship changes from taking effect anywhere in the U.S. The issue before the justices is whether to limit the authority of judges to issue nationwide injunctions, which have plagued both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past 10 years. These nationwide court orders have emerged as an important check on Trump's efforts and a source of mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies. At arguments last month, the court seemed intent on keeping a block on the citizenship restrictions while still looking for a way to scale back nationwide court orders. It was not clear what such a decision might look like, but a majority of the court expressed concerns about what would happen if the administration were allowed, even temporarily, to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally. Democratic-led states, immigrants and rights groups who sued over Trump's executive order argued that it would upset the settled understanding of birthright citizenship that has existed for more than 125 years. The court seems likely to side with Maryland parents in a religious rights case over LGBTQ storybooks in public schools Parents in the Montgomery County school system, in suburban Washington, want to be able to pull their children out of lessons that use the storybooks, which the county added to the curriculum to better reflect the district's diversity. The school system at one point allowed parents to remove their children from those lessons, but then reversed course because it found the opt-out policy to be disruptive. Sex education is the only area of instruction with an opt-out provision in the county's schools. The school district introduced the storybooks in 2022, with such titles as 'Prince and Knight' and 'Uncle Bobby's Wedding.' The case is one of several religious rights cases at the court this term. The justices have repeatedly endorsed claims of religious discrimination in recent years. The decision also comes amid increases in recent years in books being banned from public school and public libraries. A three-year battle over congressional districts in Louisiana is making its second trip to the Supreme Court Lower courts have struck down two Louisiana congressional maps since 2022 and the justices are weighing whether to send state lawmakers back to the map-drawing board for a third time. The case involves the interplay between race and politics in drawing political boundaries in front of a conservative-led court that has been skeptical of considerations of race in public life. At arguments in March, several of the court's conservative justices suggested they could vote to throw out the map and make it harder, if not impossible, to bring redistricting lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act. Before the court now is a map that created a second Black majority congressional district among Louisiana's six seats in the House of Representatives. The district elected a Black Democrat in 2024. A three-judge court found that the state relied too heavily on race in drawing the district, rejecting Louisiana's arguments that politics predominated, specifically the preservation of the seats of influential members of Congress, including Speaker Mike Johnson. The Supreme Court ordered the challenged map to be used last year while the case went on. Lawmakers only drew that map after civil rights advocates won a court ruling that a map with one Black majority district likely violated the landmark voting rights law. The justices are weighing a Texas law aimed at blocking kids from seeing online pornography Texas is among more than a dozen states with age verification laws. The states argue the laws are necessary as smartphones have made access to online porn, including hardcore obscene material, almost instantaneous. The question for the court is whether the measure infringes on the constitutional rights of adults as well. The Free Speech Coalition, an adult-entertainment industry trade group, agrees that children shouldn't be seeing pornography. But it says the Texas law is written too broadly and wrongly affects adults by requiring them to submit personal identifying information online that is vulnerable to hacking or tracking. The justices appeared open to upholding the law, though they also could return it to a lower court for additional work. Some justices worried the lower court hadn't applied a strict enough legal standard in determining whether the Texas law and others like that could run afoul of the First Amendment.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Israel issues warning to Iran amid tit-for-tat strikes: ‘Tehran will burn'
Israel issued a stark warning to Iran on Saturday as the two Middle Eastern nations continued to exchange fire: Stop the strikes or 'Tehran will burn.' 'If [Iranian Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei continue to fire missiles at the Israeli home front, Tehran will burn,' Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz wrote on social platform X following a closed-door meeting, according to a translation. 'The Iranian dictator is making the residents of Tehran hostage to his criminal policies for the survival of his regime,' he added. His comments come after Iran launched retaliatory drone and air strikes toward Israel Friday in response to the Israeli military's surprise attack a day earlier — which targeted Tehran's nuclear facilities and ballistic missile sites. In the initial strike, several prominent officials were killed, including a close adviser of Khamenei, two top Iranian nuclear scientists, the commander and deputy commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the deputy commander in chief of Iran's armed forces. In tit-for-tat exchange continued into Saturday. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his military have vowed to cripple nuclear facilities under its Operation Rising Lion mission. Strikes overnight on Tehran killed about nine senior scientists tied to warfare developments in the Islamic republic, according to Israeli officials. '9 senior scientists and experts responsible for advancing the Iranian regime's nuclear weapons program. All of the eliminated scientists and experts, eliminated based on intelligence, were key factors in the development of Iranian nuclear weapons,' The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) wrote in a post online. 'Their elimination is a significant blow to the regime's ability to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Two other senior defense and intelligence officials were pronounced dead by the Iranian regime on Saturday, NBC News reported. Civilians have not been shielded from violence, either, as 320 people were wounded in the round of attacks on Iran and 78 more killed due to continued air strikes, per the AP. The IDF said it would continue to target East Azerbaijan and the Iranian cities of Kermanshah and Lorestan as Iran's counterattacks in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv persist. Explosions and sirens were blaring across the Jewish State overnight. Two rockets were also launched from Gaza toward Israel, although there were no corresponding injuries, officials said. Turbulence in the region has also put a damper on nuclear talks between Washington and Tehran. President Trump has sought to create a new agreement with Iran that would include dismantling its nuclear capabilities. On Friday, Trump responded to Israel's surprise strike by urging the Iranian regime to come back to the negotiating table and make a deal. 'There has already been great death and destruction, but there is still time to make this slaughter, with the next already planned attacks being even more brutal, come to an end,' the president posted to Truth Social. 'Iran must make a deal, before there is nothing left, and save what was once known as the Iranian Empire,' he added. 'No more death, no more destruction, JUST DO IT, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE.' Trump also suggested in a separate post that the moment was a 'second chance.' Despite the pressure, Iran signaled that it could pull out of the upcoming nuclear talks, which are scheduled for Sunday in Oman. The administration said earlier Friday that they were not involved in Israel's attack on Iran. Later in the day, however, the U.S. did begin to military shift assets and assist with shooting down incoming ballistic missiles. Tehran has also warned that it will strike ships in the Red Sea if Britain, France or the U.S. engage in warfare. U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee (R), who remains in Israel, reflected on the overnight sirens that signaled air raids as several voices among Trump's allies have urged Trump to make a move on Iran. 'Been rough nite in Israel. Had to head to shelter 5 times during the nite. It's now Shabbat here. Should be quiet. Probably won't be,' Huckabee wrote Saturday on X. 'Entire nation under orders to stay near shelter.' In another post, the former Arkansas governor issued a reminder to those who want the U.S. to stay out of the conflict. 'If you hear 'Israel is no concern to USA' remember 700,000 AMERICANS live in Israel. That is equivalent to a full House District,' he continued 'More Americans here than in any other country except Mexico! ' 'Iran isn't just attacking Israel but your fellow Americans who live here,' he added.
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
What's left for the Supreme Court to decide? 21 cases, including state bans on transgender care
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is in the homestretch of a term that has lately been dominated by the Trump administration's emergency appeals of lower court orders seeking to slow President Donald Trump's efforts to remake the federal government. But the justices also have 21 cases to resolve that were argued between December and mid-May, including a push by Republican-led states to ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors. One of the argued cases was an emergency appeal, the administration's bid to be allowed to enforce Trump's executive order denying birthright citizenship to U.S.-born children of parents who are in the country illegally. The court typically aims to finish its work by the end of June. Here are some of the biggest remaining cases: Tennessee and 26 other states have enacted bans on certain treatment for transgender youth The oldest unresolved case, and arguably the term's biggest, stems from a challenge to Tennessee's law from transgender minors and their parents who argue that it is unconstitutional sex discrimination aimed at a vulnerable population. At arguments in December, the court's conservative majority seemed inclined to uphold the law, voicing skepticism of claims that it violates the 14th amendment's equal protection clause. The post-Civil War provision requires the government to treat similarly situated people the same. The court is weighing the case amid a range of other federal and state efforts to regulate the lives of transgender people , including which sports competitions they can join and which bathrooms they can use . In April, Trump's administration sued Maine for not complying with the government's push to ban transgender athletes in girls sports. Trump also has sought to block federal spending on gender-affirming care for those under 19 and a conservative majority of justices allowed him to move forward with plans to oust transgender people from the U.S. military . Trump's birthright citizenship order has been blocked by lower courts The court rarely hears arguments over emergency appeals, but it took up the administration's plea to narrow orders that have prevented the citizenship changes from taking effect anywhere in the U.S. The issue before the justices is whether to limit the authority of judges to issue nationwide injunctions, which have plagued both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past 10 years. These nationwide court orders have emerged as an important check on Trump's efforts and a source of mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies. At arguments last month, the court seemed intent on keeping a block on the citizenship restrictions while still looking for a way to scale back nationwide court orders. It was not clear what such a decision might look like, but a majority of the court expressed concerns about what would happen if the administration were allowed, even temporarily, to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally. Democratic-led states, immigrants and rights groups who sued over Trump's executive order argued that it would upset the settled understanding of birthright citizenship that has existed for more than 125 years. The court seems likely to side with Maryland parents in a religious rights case over LGBTQ storybooks in public schools Parents in the Montgomery County school system, in suburban Washington, want to be able to pull their children out of lessons that use the storybooks, which the county added to the curriculum to better reflect the district's diversity. The school system at one point allowed parents to remove their children from those lessons, but then reversed course because it found the opt-out policy to be disruptive. Sex education is the only area of instruction with an opt-out provision in the county's schools. The school district introduced the storybooks in 2022, with such titles as 'Prince and Knight' and 'Uncle Bobby's Wedding.' The case is one of several religious rights cases at the court this term. The justices have repeatedly endorsed claims of religious discrimination in recent years. The decision also comes amid increases in recent years in books being banned from public school and public libraries. A three-year battle over congressional districts in Louisiana is making its second trip to the Supreme Court Lower courts have struck down two Louisiana congressional maps since 2022 and the justices are weighing whether to send state lawmakers back to the map-drawing board for a third time. The case involves the interplay between race and politics in drawing political boundaries in front of a conservative-led court that has been skeptical of considerations of race in public life. At arguments in March, several of the court's conservative justices suggested they could vote to throw out the map and make it harder, if not impossible, to bring redistricting lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act . Before the court now is a map that created a second Black majority congressional district among Louisiana's six seats in the House of Representatives. The district elected a Black Democrat in 2024. A three-judge court found that the state relied too heavily on race in drawing the district, rejecting Louisiana's arguments that politics predominated, specifically the preservation of the seats of influential members of Congress, including Speaker Mike Johnson. The Supreme Court ordered the challenged map to be used last year while the case went on. Lawmakers only drew that map after civil rights advocates won a court ruling that a map with one Black majority district likely violated the landmark voting rights law. The justices are weighing a Texas law aimed at blocking kids from seeing online pornography Texas is among more than a dozen states with age verification laws. The states argue the laws are necessary as smartphones have made access to online porn, including hardcore obscene material, almost instantaneous. The question for the court is whether the measure infringes on the constitutional rights of adults as well. The Free Speech Coalition, an adult-entertainment industry trade group, agrees that children shouldn't be seeing pornography. But it says the Texas law is written too broadly and wrongly affects adults by requiring them to submit personal identifying information online that is vulnerable to hacking or tracking. The justices appeared open to upholding the law, though they also could return it to a lower court for additional work. Some justices worried the lower court hadn't applied a strict enough legal standard in determining whether the Texas law and others like that could run afoul of the First Amendment. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
