0 - this is as close to absolute immunity as exists in the law. In fact, you could, with a straight face and clean conscience call it absolute immunity.
1 - no, seriously. They can, for instance order an underage girl to be sterilized in an ex-parte hearing and face no consequences. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stump_v._Sparkman
Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978), is the leading United States Supreme Court decision on judicial immunity. It involved an Indiana judge who was sued by a young woman who had been sterilized without her knowledge as a minor in accordance with the judge's order. The Supreme Court held that the judge was immune from being sued for issuing the order because it was issued as a judicial function. The case has been called one of the most controversial in recent Supreme Court history.
The most controversial case in recent Supreme Court history being from 45 years ago speaks directly to how rare this level of controversy is.
Maybe you should be more riled up.
The point is it happened and there were no consequences or accountability for the judge involved.
If you think more minor “controversies” don’t happen every single day, enabled by this sort or legal reasoning, I cannot help you.