A federal judge appointed by President Donald Trump has been named in a judicial complaint filed this week over conduct the complainant described as "truly frightening."

Judge Roy K. Altman, nominated by Trump in 2018 to serve on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, has been outspoken in his controversial views. Those views include referring to the Palestinian keffiyeh as a "terrorism scarf" and participating in a group that opposes "lawful Islamism," the Middle East Forum, a Philadelphia-based policy organization. Altman has also aided Trump by halting an order that required the president to produce his financial records related to his lawsuit against the BBC.

The complaint, filed by a Florida attorney, was reviewed and reported on Saturday by Zeteo, an independent news outlet. It alleges that Altman potentially violated judicial ethics codes by using "judicial resources" to his own personal benefit.

"[Altman] has used significant judicial resources to engage in live podcasts from his judicial chambers, which promote his self-published book Israel on Trial, including with groups whose explicit missions are to promote the image of Israel in the United States," the complaint reads, according to Zeteo.

The complainant also flagged Altman's frequent trips to Israel, which the judge has boasted about, saying he has "taken 10% of the entire federal judiciary in America" with him on such trips in "just three years." The federal judiciary has roughly 870 life-tenured Article III judgeships nationwide, so the share Altman described would amount to more than 80 judges over that period.

"That nearly 10% of the federal judiciary may hold similar one-sided views after coming away from foreign state-sponsored trips, where they meet with foreign political officials, is truly frightening," the complaint reads.

As Zeteo noted, the U.S. Courts' code of conduct is clear about judges' responsibility to "not to any substantial degree use judicial chambers, resources, or staff to engage in extrajudicial activities permitted by this Canon." That clause sits within Canon 4 of the code, the section governing extrajudicial activities, which generally permits judges to write, teach, and speak publicly so long as those pursuits do not interfere with judicial duties, cast doubt on the judge's impartiality, or demean the office.

Under the federal Judicial Conduct and Disability Act, complaints alleging misconduct by federal judges can be filed by any person and are subject to review by the courts. Each complaint goes first to the chief judge of the circuit where the accused judge sits, in Altman's case the Eleventh Circuit covering Florida, who may dismiss it or convene a special committee whose findings can lead to action by the circuit's judicial council. Sanctions under the act stop short of removal, since ousting a life-tenured federal judge requires impeachment by Congress, and the overwhelming majority of complaints filed under the act have historically been dismissed without a formal investigation.

The complaint also arrives amid several years of heightened scrutiny of federal judges' outside activities and travel, a period that included the Supreme Court's adoption of its first formal code of conduct in November 2023 following controversies over undisclosed trips.