Be a citizen, not a subject - exercise your right to vote “NO” this November on the four ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority”- (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your home or business against seizure via eminent domain abuse, your right to be fairly represented in the legislature and Congress, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of suffering under rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” SupportClear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and your contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!
Be a citizen, not a subject - exercise your right to vote “NO” this November on the four ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority”- (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your home or business against seizure via eminent domain abuse, your right to be fairly represented in the legislature and Congress, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of suffering under rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” SupportClear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and your contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!
Either the Colorado Supreme Court Chief Justice has been afflicted by the same highly contagious epidemic of political figures “wishing to spend more time with their family” as befell Governor Ritter, or there’s something else afoot…
Those journalists willing and able to look deeper than the retirement announcement intended for public consumption didn’t have too far to dig. Reporter Joe Hanel of the Durango Herald (Denver bureau) was the first to contact Clear The Bench Colorado for comment; in his article on Mullarkey’s announced retirement (”Colorado’s Chief Justice set to retire“) he noted:
Under Mullarkey’s leadership, the court issued a series of rulings that limited the effect of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.
She wrote the 2009 opinion in Mesa County Commissioners v. State of Colorado, which upheld Ritter’s plan to freeze school property taxes without a vote of the people.
The ruling… opened the door for 11 bills that repealed tax credits and exemptions in the 2010 legislative session.
Matt Arnold is running a campaign to get voters to turn out four Supreme Court justices this November, when they face their once-in-a-decade retention votes. Mullarkey was one of the four.
“One down, three to go,” Arnold said.
In addition to the TABOR cases, conservatives chafed at rulings that kept an illegal-immigration measure off the ballot and created a congressional district map favored by Democrats.
“She hasn’t followed the constitution in years in her judgments,” Arnold said.
The Denver Post’s otherwise reasonably balanced article on Chief Justice Mullarkey’s announced retirement (”Mullarkey, chief justice of Colorado Supreme Court, stepping down” by political reporter Jessica Fender) contained only an oblique reference to the fact that “[H]er decision to step down comes amid a vigorous campaign by critics to persuade voters not to retain her on the court in November.” Apparently in deference to what seems to be official Denver Post policy (possibly related to the Post’s unwillingness to offend the sensibilities of their largest tenant and source of rent revenue), the name of the organization mounting the “vigorous campaign” is not mentioned.
Other print media also opted not to delve beyond the surface and were similarly circumspect in their commentary, including the Grand Junction Sentinel (”Mullarkey has earned much criticism during the past year“) and the Pueblo Chieftain (”Supreme Court and its decisions came under fire“); several other newspapers appeared to have simply reprinted the press release, leading one to question whether investigative journalism is completely dead.
During yesterday’s announcement about her intention to retire in November, Colorado Supreme Court Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey said a vigorous campaign against her and three other justices had nothing to do with her decision.
That’s Mullarkey malarkey, counters Matt Arnold of ClearTheBenchColorado.org, the organization spearheading the Supreme crusade.
“Any claim that this has nothing to do with my campaign is whistling in the wind,” Arnold says.
…
…there’s no denying that Arnold’s message is having an impact. But did it cause Mullarkey to surrender despite her insistence that factors like a new grandchild and her husband’s retirement motivated her decision?
Yes, Arnold believes. “It’s very clear she decided to step down because she knew she was facing a very tough retention election and would very likely be voted down — and she would go down in history as the first chief justice in the history of Colorado to be rejected by the voters. The writing was on the wall.”
In some ways, however, Arnold was disappointed by Mullarkey’s move.
“I think it’s important for voters to get involved,” he says. “If they step down, that’s obviously their decision. But it’s important for citizens to get engaged in this and realize how important it is. We not only have the right, but the duty and the responsibility to hold all officials accountable to their oath of office, whether they’re elected or appointed.
“Obviously, the preference is that the voters exercise their responsibilities and reject these people on the grounds that they’re not following the constitution. But it’s of great benefit for the citizens of the state for these anti-constitutionalist justices to leave the bench by whatever legal means, whether it’s retirement or being voted out.”
On area radio shows this weekend, numerous stations also noted the connection between Mullarkey’s announced retirement and the Clear The Bench Colorado campaign (podcasts forthcoming).
For the most part, television news lived up to it’s reputation for superficiality, merely noting the announced resignation with little comment or analysis, but panelists on the KBDI public affairs program Colorado Inside Out credited Clear The Bench Colorado with providing the impetus for the Chief Justice’s self-removal from the bench. (Program aired Friday, with repeats set for Monday & Tuesday, podcasts to follow).
Chief Justice Mullarkey’s announced retirement does not change the fact that We The People need to finish Clearing the Bench - we must still exercise our right to vote “NO” this November on the four (er, three remaining) ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority”- (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your home or business against seizure via eminent domain abuse, your right to be fairly represented in the legislature and Congress, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of suffering under rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” Continue to supportClear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and your contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!
Be a citizen, not a subject - exercise your right to vote “NO” this November on the four ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority”- (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your home or business against seizure via eminent domain abuse, your right to be fairly represented in the legislature and Congress, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of suffering under rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” SupportClear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and your contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!
Be a citizen, not a subject - exercise your right to vote “NO” this November on the four ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority”- (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your home or business against seizure via eminent domain abuse, your right to be fairly represented in the legislature and Congress, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of suffering under rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” SupportClear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and your contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!
Be a citizen, not a subject - exercise your right to vote “NO” this November on the four ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority”- (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your home or business against seizure via eminent domain abuse, your right to be fairly represented in the legislature and Congress, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of suffering under rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” SupportClear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and your contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!
Chief Justice Mullarkey’s announced retirement does not change the fact that We The People need to finish Clearing the Bench - we must still exercise our right to vote “NO” this November on the four (er, three remaining) ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority”- (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your home or business against seizure via eminent domain abuse, your right to be fairly represented in the legislature and Congress, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of suffering under rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” Continue to supportClear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and your contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!
Well-known figures in Colorado legal circles have quietly filed paperwork creating an organization to defend the state’s judiciary amid a campaign to force four state justices into retirement.
Former Colorado Public Defender David Kaplan and Berenbaum Weinshienk attorney James Kurtz-Phelan incorporated the Colorado Judiciary Project, briefly known as the Colorado Judicial Project, with the Colorado Secretary of State’s office in early April.
Trey Rogers, who only a month before the filing served as chief legal counsel to Gov. Bill Ritter, filed the group’s paperwork.
The effort comes as Clear the Bench Colorado, a local group, continues a campaign encouraging voters to vote against retaining Supreme Court Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey and justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez and Nancy Rice.
Strangely enough, all of the “well-known figures” mentioned in the article are prominent advocates for the Democrat Party - according to OpenSecrets.org, Kaplan has contributed a couple thousand to Democrat candidates, Kurtz-Phelan shelled out almost $15,000 to Democrat candidates in recent years, Trey Rogers was Gov. Ritter’s chief legal counsel, former Colorado Supreme Court justice (and current full-time activist) Jean Dubfsky contributed over $16,000 to Democrats, and of course Democrat Party attorney Mark Grueskin contributed over $12,000 cash and countless hours of “pro bono” and paid legal work to the Democrat Party, candidates, and causes.
Yet we are supposed to believe that this group’s efforts are oriented towards nonpartisan “public education” about the courts and the “judicial retention process”?
The Judiciary Project won’t directly advocate for voters to retain the four justices. Instead, it will educate voters about Colorado’s judicial-retention process, which includes lengthy judge performance evaluations, Kaplan said. Local performance commissions only rarely recommend a judge not be retained.
Puh-LEEZ! What a bunch of mullarkey! Surely they don’t think that Colorado voters are THATstupid?
As noted by the judicial watchdog and accountability group KnowYourCourts:
If we are to take them at their word, the mission seems rather redundant. It is one also claimed by the Colorado Judicial Institute and the “Our Courts” indoctrination program.
The judicial retention “process” is quite simple: those incumbent justices wishing to remain declare their intention to do so; the question of whether or not they keep their jobs appears on the ballot in the form of a question: “Should Justice [name] be retained in office?” ( Yes/NO ) Colorado voters, based on available information and their best judgement as citizens, decide and vote accordingly, exercising their rights as citizens to do so. What part of the “process” is unclear?
What HAS been lacking, in all previous retention elections, is a source of substantive information (including commentary, evaluations, and even analysis and the full text of significant cases) on which to base an informed decision - a deficit now filled to a large extent by Clear The Bench Colorado.
Grueskin’s claim that his group was not formed in response to the growing momentum and awareness generated by the judicial accountability organization Clear The Bench Colorado (Grueskin characterized the assertion as “self-aggrandizing” and “ego-driven” - sure, attack the messenger, not the message) was also exposed as a rather less than honest statement (”baldfaced lie” is perhaps a bit harsh) by a message he sent out (leaked to our sources) back in February when “brainstorming” on what to do:
You may have read about the so-called “Clear the Bench” effort, a campaign for the non-retention of Justices Mary Mullarkey, Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, and Nancy Rice at the 2010 election. The Denver Post wrote about it recently. See www.tinyurl.com/ClearTheBench.
Unfortunately - and in marked contrast to the highly transparent and publicly accountable grassroots organization Clear The Bench Colorado, which operates under the disclosure requirements of Colorado campaign finance law, providing transparency of funding and expenditures - the 501(c)4 organization formed by this cabal of activist Democrat lawyers does NOT have to disclose sources of funding to the public. They are completely unaccountable to Colorado citizens:
The Colorado Judiciary Project is organized as a 501c4, which covers civic leagues, social welfare organizations and local employee associations.
“Civic leagues” and “social welfare organizations?” Well, perhaps “local employee associations” is appropriate, since this group will be looking out for their buddies on the bench (before whom many, including Grueskin, frequently argue cases). Perhaps - perhaps - there is no formal quid pro quo, but there would certainly appear to be, at the very least, a perception of possible corruption. A strong case could be made that each of the attorneys involved in the group should be excused from arguing any case before the Colorado Supreme Court justices they are seeking to defend, in order to dispel any such perception of undue influence.
What IS abundantly clear is that this new group will collect and spend exorbitant amounts of money in an attempt to “educate” the public that “all is well” with the Colorado Judiciary, when the evidence to the contrary is abundantly clear:
Be an informed citizen - exercise your right to vote “NO” this November on the four ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority”- (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your home or business against seizure via eminent domain abuse, your right to be fairly represented in the legislature and Congress, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of suffering under rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” SupportClear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off! ) and yourcontributions- and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!
The announced retirement of U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, along with last year’s retirement of Justice David Souter, has focused attention and discussion on the desired characteristics and qualifications of a Supreme Court Justice, given the enormous influence of Supreme Court rulings on many aspects of our lives.
Two Opposing Judicial Philosophies: Rule of Law vs. “Preferred Outcome” (Judicial Activism)
In our system of justice, judges are like referees at a sporting event: at least, that’s the view of the “Rule of Law” school of jurisprudence. Like referees, judges are supposed to be impartial - taking no sides, applying the rules equally to both teams and all players. Judges must not “play favorites”, let alone be “players” themselves.
An alternative view holds that judges should NOT hold themselves above or outside the debate, but instead should be “part of the process” - influencing the results to reach a desired outcome. This view is not necessarily restricted to a particular political party or ideology; there are both “conservative” and “progressive” judges who rule based on what they personally FEEL to be “right” or “fair” - rather than the stated intent and letter of the law.
In any event, a judge’s personal preferences or prejudices are not a reliable basis for a legal system. Imagine playing a sport in which the rules are constantly changing during the game, at the whim of the referee. Even worse, the referee is friends with some of the players on the other team. Sound like fun? Not so much…
Now imagine that you’re forced to play that sport - and your earnings, your property, your freedom, even your life, might depend on the outcome. Welcome to the world of “Rule without Restraint” - or what is known as judicial activism:
American citizens are entitled to fair and even-handed treatment from their courts. All are entitled to assurance that the law means what it says, so that they can make personal or business decisions on a reasonable, predictable, and firm foundation.
SO WHAT IS THE STANDARD? HOW DO WE “JUDGE THE JUDGES?”
The American Bar Association (ABA) - an organization that may be politically suspect, but can at least be presumed to know something about judges and legal standards- has developed a “Model Code of Judicial Conduct” as a standard for “judging the judges.” Among the key “rules”:
RULE 1.1 Compliance with the Law
A judge shall comply with the law,* including the Code of Judicial Conduct.
RULE 2.2 Impartiality and Fairness
A judge shall uphold and apply the law,* and shall perform all duties of judicial office fairly and impartially.*
COMMENT
[1] To ensure impartiality and fairness to all parties, a judge must be objective and open-minded.
[2] Although each judge comes to the bench with a unique background and personal philosophy, a judge mustinterpret and apply the law without regard to whether the judge approves or disapproves of the law in question.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
[1] Even when subject to public election, a judge plays a role different from that of a legislator or executive branch official. Rather than making decisions based upon the expressed views or preferences of the electorate, a judge makes decisions based upon the law and the facts of every case.
It is clear that the four justices who are up for retention on the Colorado Supreme Court fall short of meeting these important standards.
This November, render your verdict- hold these unjust justices accountable for their judicial activism and their lack of judicial restraint. Vote “NO” - do not retain Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey on the Colorado Supreme Court.
Be a citizen, not a subject - exercise your right to vote “NO” this November on the four ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority”- (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your home or business against seizure via eminent domain abuse, your right to be fairly represented in the legislature and Congress, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of suffering under rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” SupportClear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off! ) and yourcontributions- and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!