Victor Marrero

When it comes to sentencing, I see Judge Marrero as a close to the vest bean-counter. He is very pleasant and courteous but he does not engage with the lawyers or defendant and does not seem to sink his teeth into the arguments that are presented; rather, he listens patiently to what each party has to say and then simply imposes sentence without any further discussion or comment.

I was a prospective juror in Judge Marrero's courtroom. I have served on other juries and respected and admired the judges I witnessed. But not Judge Marrero. He treats jurors shabbily, as if they were servants. He threatened that anyone late would have sanctions imposed, including further jury service. First, using jury service as a punishment is outrageous. Second, it is not in his power to do that, and it is abuse of the judicial bench to do so. Jurors are culled from areas that can require 3 hours of commuting. He also aimed this at a woman who was 45 minutes late, had notified the court of her unintentional delay. The delays of court, lawyers, and the judge are understandable albeit annoying to jurors are understood. Sometimes so are other human beings' reasons to be late. Although I salute the judge on his opinion re Donald Trump's taxes, his relationship with jurors and prospective jurors without calling on lawyers to question during voir dire (I can understand why that would seem to be efficient, but it is unwise), his sardonic attitude to people wanting to be good jurors, his mangled syntax in asking questions of jurors (often with double negatives that had us scratching our heads), and indifference to people with travel and other plans that could not be changed - really, if jury duty is a privilege and a responsibility, the trial cannot be held without a jury - we are the linchpin of the trial system and we deserve greater respect. We want to be of service!!! Judge Murrero looked uncaring, indifferent, annoyed at any inconvenience...it is a shame. He is the only judge I have ever heard prospective jurors criticizing heavily during voir dire. Usually, no one says anything about the judge. But I doubt that would matter to him. In a way, his arrogance is similar to Donald Trump's. Maybe he thinks he doesn't need us.My opinion has nothing to do with his judicial ability, which I did not witness. His staff was courteous and helpful. But he himself was arrogant,

Right ruling on Trumps tax returns used facts not emotions and rantings from trumps incompetent legal team to make his decision.

Very fair judge..dosent like petty..exceptionally sharp..do not insult his intelligence...should be more judges like him..

Excellent judge.

He broke almost every rule in the book. He misunderstood the IP laws involved, decided the case based on speculation and not the evidence before him, and did "research" on the side and then came into court and used it. About the only smart thing he did was stay the case to permit an appeal on which he was reversed.

Outstanding jurist. Concise understanding of the law and appreciation of legislative intent. Takes his job very seriously and takes the time to have a full understanding of an area before writing.

Has definite opinions but they don't sseem to have much to do with the prevailing law or even an arguable extension or modification of the established law.

Judge Marrero is pleasant to deal with and allows counsel a fair opportunity to be heard. He's just not smart. He cannot master complex fact scenarios or nuances in the law. I, too, have seen him get the law completely wrong on issues any federal judge sees regularly.

The Judge dismissed an antitrust lawsuit regarding naked short stock sales, largely due to his belief that jurors couldn't understand the issues. This reasoning seems to me to be a travesty to justice. The law was not protected nor enforced and the populace (investors) was not well served.

I'm not a constitutional expert by any stretch, but I am certainly appreciative of any attempt to protect citizens from unchecked, unbalanced power. The Patriot Act has always reminded me of the quote about sacrificing liberty to obtain security (I've seen too many variations and attributions of the quote for me to try to get it right here). In my opinion, Marrero's words as quoted in comment 4756 rank just as highly in importance and gravity in the current "War on Terror".

Just want to say thanks for standing up for America....not the Bush Crime Family take on 'patriotism' but the cold, hard, real thing. Cheers!

It's refreshing to hear that someone is protecting our rights these days. That's the real war that we're in. Thank you, Judge Marrero!

"The Constitution was designed so that the dangers of any given moment would never suffice as justification for discarding fundamental individual liberties or circumscribing the judiciary's unique role under our governmental system in protecting those liberties and upholding the rule of law." - Federal court judge Victor Marrero, brilliantly worded. This man has earned a very deep respect from me, for upholding our nation's firmest beliefs.

I really enjoy appearing before this judge. He is courteous, patient, respectful of lawyers and always very well prepared. Very reasonable with scheduling and flexible if parties need his assistance.

Fair and even handed; no agendas; will listen to both sides and do what he believes is right.

A pleasure to appear in his court. He reads the parties' papers and listens to the lawyers' arguments. A very respectful and patient jurist.

The last numerical rating for Judge Marrero -- posted by Court staff, without leaving any comments -- gave him 10s across the board. I would strongly consider the source of this numerical rating in light of other, more balanced ratings, when evaluating Judge Marrero.

He took a lot time to try and settle an ADEA case. The case did not settle then, but subsequently settled before trial. I thought he was a fine judge.

Screwed up the standard formula for preliminary injunction, in an issued opinion. Decided dispositive motion without reading papers (in 15 minutes on 200 pages of submissions from counsel). Carries self-importance to an absurd level (viz. terrorism case in which he defined himself as a bulwark of society). Allows his clerks to be snotty to counsel.