A sitting federal judge got himself into some major trouble this week after an appearance on CNN during which he criticized former President Donald Trump, who just happens to have a case pending in the judge’s D.C. jurisdiction.

OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.

U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton, a sitting federal judge who has heard Jan. 6 cases involving supporters of President Donald Trump, and often has thrown the book at defendants, granted an interview to CNN and repeatedly bashed Trump, who has been targeted by multiple Democrat lawfare cases, including a contrived “hush money” case being heard by Judge Juan Merchan.

Now, Walton has had an ethics complaint filed against him by Mike Davis, founder of the Article III Project.

“We are seeing a dangerous pattern in which DC federal judges, like … Reggie Walton have convinced themselves they have a duty–unbounded by the judicial canons–to make extrajudicial pronouncements about President Trump,” his 13-page accusation includes.

Davis sent his complaint to Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Davis told the New York Post a reprimand would be appropriate for Walton, to “send a very clear message” that judges “cannot take off their political robes and climb into the political arena.”

He cited the Code of Conduct for United States Judges that judges are not allowed to “denigrate public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity.”

Davis, in the Post report, said, “It is much worse when a different judge–especially a sitting federal judge–thinks it is his job to moonlight as a CNN commentator on a pending criminal case in another judge’s court.”

The letter cites the politics of the case against Trump, and the fact that Democrats are trying to prevent him from exercising his speech rights on the topic.

“If there is anyone in America who must have the constitutional right to speak out against the judge, the prosecutors, their staff, the witnesses, their potential biases, and the criminal process, it is a criminal defendant. Preventing a criminal defendant from exercising this bedrock constitutional right through a gag order–a prior restraint on free speech and an obvious obstacle to due process and a fair trial–is illegal, unconstitutional, and unconscionable,” the letter said.

“This is especially true when a criminal defendant believes political opponents have politicized and weaponized our criminal-justice system against him. It is truly unbelievable that any American judge would place a gag order on a presidential candidate during the height of a presidential campaign, especially when the presidential candidate believes the criminal indictments are part of his opponent’s political campaign of lawfare and election interference,” it added.

The letter added, “We have entered very dangerous territory as a country when attorneys accuse a criminal defendant of making a ‘violent threat’ against a judge for simply raising evidence of the judge’s potential bias. And it would be inexcusable for another sitting judge–especially a federal judge–to go on a primetime national television broadcast, with hundreds of thousands of viewers (including the criminal defendant’s jury pool), and make such clearly inappropriate, defamatory, highly prejudicial, and outrageous claims against a criminal defendant while his criminal case is pending trial before a different judge.”

It continued, “Unbelievably, this is precisely what Judge Reggie Walton, a senior judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, did…”

Davis noted that earlier another judge, Beryl Howell, made comments about Trump “unbounded by the judicial canons.”

The letter notes that Walton earlier blasted Trump as a “charlatan.”

Davis’ letter warns that Walton’s rant may already have “poisoned” a potential jury poll for case against Trump.

Disclaimer: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.