The aim of this paper is to present the issue of judicial freedom of expression in the perspective of obligations that are inherent in the judicial role. The fulfilment of such a task is dictated firstly by the presentation of an epistemic and egalitarian view of judicial humility. Based on this distinction I hypothesise two directions of thinking about judicial freedom of expression. The epistemic variant, focusing on the role aspect, presents the judge as a special category of citizen due to the obligations connected with his or her profession. The egalitarian variant presents an image of the judge as a citizen. The whole study is completed by the justification of the choice of a research topic. Among the reasons, technological changes and the related development of social media deserve special attention. The implementation of the tasks mentioned above allows several conclusions to be drawn. One of them concerns the mentioned hypothesis, which is given a correction. The other conclusion, in turn, concerns the variables in view of which the scope of judicial freedom of expression can be examined. The first of these is the sphere in which the judge’s expression occurs, the second is the object of that expression, and the third variable is the cultural aspect.

The article attempts to present the identity of the judge through the metaphor of the role as an interactive ritual. The framework of this ritual can be described by means of both intersubjective factors (e.g. legal rules) and individual factors (the subjectivity of the role performer). I apply this conception to the iconic symbol of justice in public space, which is usually associated with the figure of a woman whose eyes are covered with a blindfold, holding the scales of justice in one hand and a sword in the other. It is a visual symbol of the judge; one that is comprehensible to both lawyers and the public.
In carrying out this task, I refer to sociological and anthropological research in the field of visual culture. This perspective determines not only the subject matter covered by the theses formulated in the article but also the research method. It is assumed that visual representation constitutes a communication channel that has a great impact on individual and social memory. For this reason, the presentation of the role of the image and the methods of its interpretation is important for the debate about the role of the judge and the image of the judge in public space. This approach to the subject, which consists in shifting the emphasis from text to image, also rehabilitates the significance of visual representation in jurisprudence, a field traditionally dominated by the view that law is a linguistic phenomenon.

This article has originated from observations of the current Polish political and legal disputes over the Constitution. In pursuing the reasons for the different lines of the argumentation presented, we have brought the issue of education in constitutional law to attention. We have covered the issue in two stages. The first stage involves a discussion of education models as expounded in social theory. Our starting point was the structural-functional model and its criticism along the lines of conflict, interpretative, and critical theories. This is followed by a presentation of the evolution of administrative-law institutions in the light of the conflict between the expected openness to ethical and political dimensions and the claims for integrity and coherence. To this end, we followed the proposals of Nonet and Selznick. The second stage includes a review of three conceptions of the constitution and constitutionalism. The views of Kelsen, Schmitt as well as the American judicial review doctrine served as model examples. These proposals can be presented as the cornerstones of three visions of constitutional-law education. We did not content ourselves with presenting a set of models of education and covering a reconstruction of the vision of constitutional education. We have also attempted to demonstrate, bearing in mind the nature of the Polish debate over the Constitution, that the judicial review doctrine opens up a promising sphere for a revaluation of both the theory and practice of constitutional law.