‘A, B, C, D, F, U’: Field Sobriety Test For Federal Judge Who Allegedly ‘Urinated Himself’ Goes Remarkably Off Script

Above the Law

by Staci Zaretsky

February 20, 2026

AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary

A federal judge from Michigan, Thomas L. Ludington, has faced a series of bizarre and concerning allegations following a DUI arrest. According to a police report, Ludington was involved in a car crash last October and struggled during field sobriety tests, including failing to recite the alphabet properly and allegedly urinating himself. The 72-year-old judge, who reportedly told officers he was a federal judge multiple times, claimed he hadn’t been drinking but had a blood-alcohol content of 0.27, more than three times the legal limit. The incident unfolded after Ludington crashed his vehicle, where responding troopers detected a strong smell of alcohol and noted his slurred speech and inability to follow instructions during the alphabet test. Ludington’s performance was described as disorienting, with one officer stating he responded in a manner reminiscent of “edgy humor.” Despite repeated attempts, Ludington failed to complete the breathalyzer test correctly, becoming argumentative when instructed to do so properly. Ludington was taken to a hospital after being handcuffed and later released on a $500 bond. He faces misdemeanor charges of operating a vehicle with a blood-alcohol content of 0.17 or higher and operating while intoxicated. The judge, a George W. Bush appointee who remains on the bench, has pleaded not guilty and is scheduled for a jury trial in May. This case raises significant questions about accountability within the judiciary, particularly when a judge accused of DUI allegedly struggles to perform basic tasks during law enforcement procedures. The public record of Ludington’s alleged behavior—failing to recite the alphabet correctly and making inappropriate remarks—has sparked widespread attention and debate over how such incidents are handled in legal circles. As a federal judge, Ludington’s actions have drawn scrutiny not only for his alleged DUI but also for the broader implications of his conduct on public trust in the judiciary. The case highlights the intersection of law enforcement, judicial integrity, and personal accountability. While Ludington maintains his innocence and has yet to be proven guilty, the allegations underscore the challenges faced by individuals in positions of authority when their actions come under intense public and legal scrutiny. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how similar situations are addressed in the future.

Verticals

legalnews

Originally published on Above the Law on 2/20/2026