🎓 Back to Law School — not fit for the bench. Colin Stirling Bruce holds 5 of seven, but fails a critical Article (Ethics & Recusal). A capable jurist who forgot day one — recusal. Back to school for the ethics module.
“No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause.” — Madison, Federalist No. 10
Seventh Circuit Judicial Council admonished him for improper ex parte emails with the U.S. Attorney's office; removed from those criminal cases (Illinois Times).
60
2Fidelity to Democracycritical
74%★ earned
“…a government of laws, and not of men.” — Marshall, Marbury v. Madison
No documented defiance of higher courts or election-related misconduct; the conduct matter did not implicate constitutional-order fidelity.
60
3Judicial Temperament
68%★ earned
“Justice must satisfy the appearance of justice.” — Frankfurter
Emails disparaged a defendant and prosecutors' performance, though no formal incivility complaint toward litigants was sustained (News-Gazette).
60
4Reason, Not Ideology
70%★ earned
“We are not final because we are infallible…” — Robert H. Jackson
The judicial council found the improper communications had not affected his decision-making, per its review of roughly 1,230 emails.
60
5Intellectual Honesty & Precedent
64%★ earned
“…to stand by things decided.” (stare decisis) — the common-law maxim
The undisclosed ex parte contacts with a prosecutor's office reflect a lapse in candor about communications, though rulings were left intact.
60
6Independence from Party
56%☆ not yet
“The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential.” — Hamilton, Federalist No. 78
Documented ex parte closeness to the U.S. Attorney's office created an appearance of favoring the government; a defendant won resentencing (Seventh Circuit).
60
7Personal Integrity
66%★ earned
“The time is always right to do what is right.” — Martin Luther King Jr.
Council found no corruption and no altered outcomes, but the admonishment and required ethics retraining mark a documented integrity lapse.
60
Challenge this review＋
This review is offered freely and openly to correction. A challenge is considered only when it states a specific reason and links to sources that substantiate it — an assertion without evidence is not reviewed.
Are you Colin Stirling Bruce? An official named in a review may answer it by phone rather than in writing. Confirm it's you and we'll arrange a call.
Scores are Independent 2026’s own editorial read against the Seven Articles — ≥60% earns the star. The first two Articles are critical: fail Ethics & Recusal or Fidelity to Democracy and there is no seal, whatever else holds. Each Article carries its founding quote as the yardstick. On bias →