The long, flowing garments judges wear in court are called robes, or sometimes gowns. The two words mean the same thing in a legal setting and are used interchangeably. In the United States, these judicial robes are almost always plain black, a convention that has held since the early 1800s. Style and color vary in other countries, but the basic idea is the same everywhere: a distinctive garment that visually sets the wearer apart from everyone else in the room.
Robe or Gown?
“Robe” is the usual word in American English. “Gown” shows up more often in British and Commonwealth legal systems. When people want to be specific, they say “judicial robe” to distinguish it from academic or clerical robes of similar shape. All three trace back to the same medieval academic dress, which is why a judge’s robe looks a lot like what a university chancellor wears at graduation.
Why They Are Black
The short answer is mourning. English judges and lawyers originally wore colorful robes, but after the death of King Charles II in 1685, the legal profession adopted plain black as a sign of mourning. The practice never reverted, and those black robes, with their pleated shoulders and bell-shaped sleeves, became the standard that eventually traveled to every British colony, including what would become the United States.
Early U.S. Supreme Court justices did not start out in plain black. Chief Justice John Jay and his colleagues wore robes trimmed with red and white on the front and sleeves, similar to those of English and colonial judges. Jay’s original robe is now held by the Smithsonian Institution. By 1800, the Court had shifted to all black, and when John Marshall became Chief Justice in 1801, the plain black robe was already the established norm.1Supreme Court of the United States. The Court and Its Traditions The founding generation had already dropped powdered wigs, so American judicial dress ended up considerably more stripped-down than its English counterpart from the start.
No federal rule actually requires a judge to wear a robe. The practice is universal anyway. Former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor once noted that there are no rules dictating what justices must wear on the bench, and there is not even a common source for Supreme Court robes. The tradition holds through institutional gravity rather than any written mandate.
Who Actually Wears Them
In American courtrooms, judges are the only participants who wear robes. Lawyers wear business suits, usually dark. Parties, witnesses, and spectators follow whatever conservative dress standard the court enforces, but nobody besides the judge puts on a robe.
England and Wales do things differently. Barristers appearing in the Crown Court and certain higher courts wear black gowns along with wing collars and white linen bands tied at the throat. The Bar Council’s current guidance states that counsel should generally robe whenever the judge is robed.2The Bar Council. Bar Council Court Dress Guidance Wigs remain part of formal court dress in criminal proceedings, though recent reforms allow dispensations for barristers whose religious practice, hairstyle traditions, or disabilities make wig-wearing impractical.
Canadian judges across various court levels wear black robes, with trim and design varying by court. Supreme Court of Canada justices appear in scarlet, fur-trimmed robes for ceremonial occasions. In British Columbia, Provincial Court judges wear black robes with red facing down the front and around a cape collar, while judicial justices in the same province wear similar robes with green bands.3Provincial Court of British Columbia. Why Canadian Judges Wear Robes
Variations Around the World
Judicial dress varies dramatically across legal traditions. In England and Wales, judges may wear crimson robes, black silk gowns, or ceremonial dress with elaborate accessories depending on the court level and type of case. Wigs persist in criminal courts but have been dropped in family courts and some other settings.2The Bar Council. Bar Council Court Dress Guidance The English system also preserves “bands,” two rectangles of white linen tied at the throat, a holdover from the 1680s when they replaced the Elizabethan ruff collar.3Provincial Court of British Columbia. Why Canadian Judges Wear Robes
In Saudi Arabia, judges, prosecutors, and lawyers are required to wear the bisht during court sessions. The bisht is a traditional long cloak worn over a thobe, and it can range from minimalist black to versions with ornamental trim. The Philippines takes yet another approach: the Supreme Court’s official color is purple, which shows up in the justices’ regalia and in institutional branding.
What the Robe Is For
Beyond its origins, the robe serves a practical purpose. The uniform appearance flattens individual identity. A judge in a robe reads less as a specific person and more as an embodiment of the court’s authority. That visual anonymity reinforces impartiality, which is the whole point of the garment: the decision should come from the law, not from the personality behind the bench. When every judge in the building wears the same thing, no one’s taste, wealth, or background is on display, and the courtroom reads as a space that operates by different rules than the one outside its doors.