What's the point in attacking the judge? Judges just apply the law as they find it, by analyzing the wording of the legislation and any binding precedents from previous cases. The judge is only a "moron" if they stated a point of law which is actually wrong (wrong in the sense of being contrary to the law, not wrong in the sense that you don't like it), and even then "moron" would be a pretty harsh assessment unless it's a glaring mistake. It's often the case that the law isn't obvious or entirely clear and judges have to make their best effort to work out the correct meaning. Even then, their job is to apply what they think the law intended to say, not what they think is morally the best interpretation.

If you really must call someone a moron, you should direct it at the legislators who made the law (or left it sufficiently unclear) which resulted in the judge's conclusion.