You have the right to look ridiculous.

A Bronx judge has thrown out a summons issued against a Bronx man for wearing saggy pants, finding that “the Constitution still leaves some opportunity for people to be foolish if they so desire.”

Judge Ruben Franco said that although Julio Martinez may have offended the fashion police with his low-hanging and underwear-exposing pants, his manner of dress didn’t deserve a ticket from a cop.

“While most of us may consider it distasteful, and indeed foolish, to wear one’s pants so low as to expose the underwear . . . people can dress as they please, wear anything, so long as they do not offend public order and decency,” the judge wrote.

Martinez was given his summons for disorderly conduct on April 20 of last year.

The summons by the unidentified police officer charged that Martinez had acted in a disorderly manner because he had “his pants down below his buttocks exposing underwear [and] potentially showing private parts.”

There was no other reason listed for the ticket besides Martinez’s pants, and Franco noted: “The issuance of this summons appears to be an attempt by one police officer to show his displeasure with a particular style of dress.”

The officer has plenty of company — the sloppy look has been the subject of derision from people ranging from Bill Cosby to President Obama, and the super-low rider has been banned in numerous towns across the country.

In New York, the boxers-baring look has been the subject of a targeted campaign by state Sen. Eric Adams of Brooklyn, who put up billboards urging youngsters to “Stop the Sag.” He has said he doesn’t want to criminalize saggy pants — he just wants youngsters to know it’s time to send the fashion trend the way of the legwarmer.

“You can raise your level of respect if you raise your pants,” Adams said in a YouTube video.

The judge’s decision said the “trend of wearing pants well below the waistline is believed to have its roots in this country’s prison system where inmates are issued uniforms which are often too big and the wearing of belts is prohibited due to safety concerns.”

While there have been efforts to outlaw the look around the country, Franco wrote, “New York has no such legislation.”

That means in Martinez’s case, the officer apparently overstepped his bounds by giving him a summons for disorderly conduct.

To meet that standard, the offensive conduct must be “public in nature and must cause inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm to a substantial segment of the public,” and there’s no evidence the suspect’s skivvies set off such a panic, the judge said.

Martinez could not be reached and his Legal Aid lawyer did not return calls for comment. The decision was issued last month.

dareh.gregorian@nypost.com

