Clark's 1905 Oxford text surrounds iudices with commas, marking it off as a vocative plural:
quem ego vobis, si quid habet aut momenti commendatio aut auctoritatis confirmatio mea, consul consulem, iudices, ita commendo <ut> cupidissimum oti, studiosissimum bonorum, acerrimum contra seditionem, fortissimum in bello, inimicissimum huic coniurationi quae nunc rem publicam labefactat futurum esse promittam et spondeam.
And that's how it's translated in the Yonge translation on Perseus that you point to:
Him, if my recommendation has any weight if my solemn assertion has any authority, I now recommend to you, O judges—I the consul recommend him to you as consul, promising and undertaking that he will prove most desirous of tranquillity, most anxious to consult the interests of virtuous men, very active against sedition, very brave in war, and an irreconcilable enemy to this conspiracy, which is at this moment seeking to undermine the republic.
The 'I...recommend' in the translation is rendering commendo, not iudices.
It is odd that the Word Study Tool singles out 'in my judgment' as the definition for judex – and 'to fine' as the definition for the verb judico:
However, if you look in the actual Lewis and Short entry that the results are based on, 'in my judgment' is specifically the translation of judice me (under 'II. Trop.'). It just shows that the tool needs to be used judiciously (no pun intended).