When we speak of judges who judge for Utopia, we speak about judges today who pursue a better world through their judging. In this contribution, it is argued that a judiciary that is actively engaged in making the world a better place is good for society, also from a legal point of view. Since the most urgent call for utopian law and utopian judging today is on the issue of climate change, litigation in this field forms the main case for discussion. Controversial issues of utopian judging arise when there is disagreement in society over the direction the judiciary is taking, or when the judiciary is taking a separate way from the legislator or the executive power. In such situations, utopian judges may come under criticism for judicial activism or excessive judicial review. It is submitted here that disagreements and differences are, however, not something that should be avoided; they drive the system forward in the exercise of checks and balances. Climate change litigation is an example where there is a need for this today.