Judges must be above ism. They must owe their allegiance only to constitutional-ism. An ideal judge is a constitutionalist judge.
Judges must not write any political or personal statement in their judgements. Quoting from authentic sources are permitted but then judges must show respect to the original author and the source. Judges must not quote religious books how so ever fundamental they are being canvassed because by quoting those books the book itself gets a sort of legal and judicial recognition .
Judges must verify the source book, its authenticity and level of its acceptability among the academicians. Nothing should be done to legitimatise any controversy. Judges should not enter into controversies not brought before them for adjudication. The writings must be straight and judges must always write what they mean, and mean what they write. Judgements should not carry sarcastic remarks, racial embarks, or never be writing like a fundamentalist. The writing of judges must not mean several  meanings simultaneously and must decide without confusion.
Writing judgements mean writing for the litigants a judgement, statement of facts and reasoning which can be carried to the litigant without much pains. Judgements are not literary works or all time literature-compositions depicting the great imagination of the writer.Great words, show of word power, ability to write scholarly write ups, showcasing ones own learning on the subject, projecting self esteem must be avoided.