This chapter examines how applying queer theory to judging would change the act of judging. The queer judge may destabilise normative presumptions, both those involving the application of cis-heteronormative social norms and processes in which formalism is preferred to flexibility and empathy in judicial decision-making. While the queer judge is keenly aware of the constraints of normativity and may at times challenge them, they must also, like many queers who perform respectability, comply with normative standards. This chapter examines how judges balance queering judging with maintaining the judicial role. The second part of the chapter explores how queer judging may work within differing judicial models. The extent and ways in which queer judges may interrogate normative presumptions and prioritise justice over formalism are necessarily affected by their court environment. The chapter considers how adjudication processes that allow dissenting judgments or require consensus decision-making may empower or restrain queer judging, especially in systems where the majority of judges do not embrace the spirit of queer theory or understand queer lives.