Judge Tong Returns to Court After Boycott Overturned
The District Attorney's office is required to resume appearances in cases before the judge.
Updated on Oct. 15, 2026 in Criminal Justice
Live Poll
Should local prosecutors be allowed to systematically boycott judges they believe are biased?
Criminal cases in San Francisco no longer face indefinite delays tied to blanket boycotts of Judge Michelle Tong. A Superior Court ruling has effectively ended the District Attorney's office practice of refusing to appear before the judge.
Why it matters
The practice of boycotting specific judges created a backlog of more than 340 cases, stalling justice for defendants and victims alike. The resolution of this dispute marks a return to standard operations in the criminal courts following state-level legal intervention.
The District Attorney's blanket refusal to appear before Judge Michelle Tong resulted in over 340 delayed cases during 2025. It remains unknown how many of these specific case files will require expedited processing to clear the backlog.
The players
Rochelle East
The Superior Court Presiding Judge who oversaw the rehearing and issued the ruling to end the boycott.
Michelle Tong
A Superior Court Judge who had been the subject of a blanket refusal to appear by the District Attorney's office.
The details
Presiding Judge Rochelle East ruled that the District Attorney's office failed to act in good faith when issuing blanket objections against Judge Tong. The decision followed a rehearing prompted by defense attorneys citing a May 2026 California Supreme Court ruling on judicial challenges. The District Attorney's office has since rescinded all remaining challenges against Judge Tong.
Timeline
Early 2025: The District Attorney's office began a blanket refusal to appear before Judge Tong.
May 2026: The California Supreme Court ruled on the legality of bad faith judicial boycotts.
October 6, 2026: Defense attorneys officially challenged the boycott policy in court.
October 8, 2026: Judge East reversed the previous ruling and ended the boycott.
Across the Bay
This ruling follows the legal standard set by the J.O. v. Superior Court decision regarding bad faith challenges to judges. It signals a shift away from the unilateral boycott tactics that became a point of contention in San Francisco courts starting in 2022.
If you are involved in a criminal case previously stalled by the boycott of Judge Tong, you should expect your case to resume its normal schedule. Consult your legal counsel or the public defender's office for updates on your specific court date.
The takeaway
The court system has moved to prevent further systemic delays by restricting the use of bad-faith judicial boycotts. Residents should monitor upcoming court calendars to see how quickly the 340 backlogged cases are processed following this mandate.
Further reading
For more on the local court system, visit Criminal Justice.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Mission Local.
Live Poll
Should local prosecutors be allowed to systematically boycott judges they believe are biased?
