Appealing the judge's ruling would be meaningless. Appeals are designed to correct "errors of law." But here, the judge made no "error of law." Rather, the j

Appealing the judge's ruling would be meaningless. Appeals are designed to correct "errors of law." But here, the judge made no "error of law." Rather, the judge committed a grave ethical violation. The judge delegated her decision-making duties to a third party (ChatGPT!). In America, judges are forbidden to delegate their decision-making duties. Such delegation is NOT a "judicial act," and therefore, because there was NO "judicial act" -- judicial immunity does NOT apply. P.S. I'm the guy who sued the judge. :)