Their wrong actions? What wrong actions? The judge did their job: they considered the facts and the law, and applied their legal reasoning, and reached a conclusion.
The fact that you don't like the conclusion doesn't mean the judge acted wrongly. There's nothing to be held accountable for.
The reasoning or decision itself, on the other hand, will go through the processes of review that almost all judicial decisions go through.
It isn't merely a controversial ruling, it might be easily construed as a favor to friends (police and/or the clerks who published the document by mistake).
It is an incorrect ruling, since it directly contradicts precedent.
This sort of thing often slows down promotions into higher courts (as it should — lower courts should not routinely waste everyone’s time and money with rulings that will surely be overturned on appeal).
