Judicial ethics and conduct guides emphasize dignity, decorum, patience, and courtesy, contributing to an understanding of judging as rational, detached, and unemotional. However, these are also interactional capacities, implying the presence of emotion and emotion work. Empirical research finds that judicial officers express considerable awareness of the need for judicial emotional capacities and emotion work and undertake a range of strategies to manage emotion. This judicial experience shows that available guidance does not adequately address emotion in judicial officers’ everyday work. Improved guidance will explicitly recognize judicial work as an interactional space, generating emotion and demanding emotion work.

Recent theorising about feminist judging has concentrated on appellate courts and their judgments. This paper develops a conceptualisation of feminist judging in lower, first instance courts, which are dominated by high case volume and limited time for each matter, with decisions given orally and ex tempore rather than in elaborated written judgments. Through careful accounts of the philosophy, goals and practices of conventional as well as newer, more engaged approaches to judging, the paper compares and contrasts feminist judging with other approaches to judging in the lower courts. This entails considering dimensions such as the judicial officer's orientation to substantive law and practice in court, concepts of fairness, ethical commitments, the view of the defendant, and judicial qualities and capacities.

The demeanor exhibited by a judge is a key element in criminal proceedings, especially in direct interactions with the defendant, defense representatives, and prosecutors. The judicial demeanor(s) displayed must meet the normative confines of the judicial role—primarily impartiality—within the practical constraints of long case lists, when interactions are subject to considerable time pressure.

Drawing on findings from an extensive national court observation study, this article examines the varied demeanors displayed by magistrates—the presiding judicial officers—in Australia's lower courts. It explores the complex meanings of these demeanors, and considers how they may enhance or undermine the legitimacy of judicial authority.