‘You Ever Chopped Cotton?’: White Florida Judge Publicly Reprimanded for Outrageous Questioning of Black Woman at a Plea Hearing, Claims He Isn’t Racist
A Central Florida judge who stirred controversy for asking a Black defendant if she had “ever chopped cotton” will be formally and publicly reprimanded.
The incident occurred in July 2025, but the sanctions just came to light after court records were filed with the Florida Supreme Court on March 26.
The Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC), the state’s oversight body, found Judge John Jordan had violated judicial ethics during the racist exchange with a 33-year-old Black woman and her great-uncle.
The defendant was involved in a felony battery case and appeared before Jordan in the Ninth Judicial Circuit of Florida for a plea hearing. She was negotiating a plea agreement that required 30 hours of community service as a disciplinary measure when Jordan made the concerning off-the-cuff remarks.
“Do you own any land where I could have her work it for 30 hours?” he asked the woman’s great uncle, who tried to laugh off the odd question.
Jordan continued: “All my family’s farming. They’d love me out there. 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. All right. Well, no pulling weeds for your great-uncle then. So, let’s move on.”
This concerning flub followed a separate incident in April 2025, in which Jordan raised his voice at two public defenders, telling them to “shut up” three times when they complained about being treated unfairly and rushed.
According to the investigative panel, Jordan “failed to grasp in the moment, or in the days thereafter, how his words clearly were inappropriate.”
“In particular, Judge Jordan acknowledges that he failed to consider how his comments, as a judge considering whether to order a black defendant to ‘work the land,’ immediately followed by a reference to “chopping cotton,” could have been interpreted (and indeed were interpreted) as inappropriate, especially in light of the historically demeaning stereotype associating black people with picking cotton.”
Though Jordan insisted he is not racist, he admitted that his comments were “not dignified” and could damage public perception that “justice being meted out by the judicial branch is based only on the facts and the law, and not a person’s race.”
Notably, he provided no explanation for why he asked a Black woman about chopping cotton as a possible disciplinary action instead of, say, volunteering at a charity or doing some other type of community service.
The commission, however, did not find evidence that Jordan makes rulings or decisions “improperly based on race,” which would have resulted in much more severe sanctions for the judge, including the possibility of losing his job.