The resurgence of “We The People” in the form of local citizens banding together in grassroots civic action organizations to defend our constitutional rights is THE continuing political story of the year 2010 in America and is profoundly affecting Colorado Politics in this year and beyond…

Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold is both proud and humbled to have been invited as a guest speaker to several such groups over the last several months - beginning with the massive (7000+) crowd at the first Tax Day Tea Party rally at the Denver Capitol and continuing through several events throughout the Spring (examples here, and here), Summer (examples here, here, and here) Fall (examples here, here, here, here, and here) and Winter (examples here, and here) of 2009 - we’re back for more in 2010, most prominently at the Tax Day Tea Party rallies on April 15th.

Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold discusses the impact of Colorado Supreme Court rulings leading to a massive expansion of government power (at the expense of YOUR constitutional rights) and vastly increased taxation (such as the “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” property tax increase, the “Dirty Dozen” tax increases and of course the Colorado Car Tax (er, “vehicle registration fee”) increase, along with the dominant role of the Colorado Supreme Court in determining our legislative district boundaries (including both the State and Federal level - deciding how YOU will be represented in Congress and in the Colorado Legislature) and the issue of judicial retention elections for the Colorado Supreme Court following the announcement by Chief Justice Mullarkey that she would resign rather than be held accountable by Colorado voters - at the Western Slope Conservative Alliance in Grand Junction Thursday  (starting at 6PM, Grand Junction City Hall) and on Friday in Craig for lunch (noon at Carelli’s Pizzeria & Pasta, 465 Yampa Ave. in Craig) and Meeker ( at Kilowatt Korner, 6th and Market starting at 6:30 PM) in the evening.

The Colorado Supreme Court - and particularly, the Chief Justice - exercises enormous power (”clout”) over the lives of Colorado citizens.  The current majority has repeatedly demonstrated that it does not exercise this power with restraint or consideration for your constitutional rights - ruling consistently against individual protections and in favor of expanded government power.  Upholding tax increases (such as the “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” property tax increase, or the “Dirty Dozen” new tax laws) imposed without the required vote of the people, enabling taxes to be collected under the guise of “fees” (such as the Colorado Car Tax), expanding eminent domain abuse to seize people’s property, and grabbing the (legislative) power to draw up voting districts (aided by the recent “Mary-mandering” bill) - this court is acting like rulers, with you as the subjects; re-writing the laws, instead of upholding them.

Be a citizen, not a subject - get informed, then exercise your 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 soon-to-be-minus 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 support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!

Following the deluge of news coverage of Clear The Bench Colorado in both statewide and national media over the weekend (with, of course, the notable exception of the Denver Post, stuck in “hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil” monkey-mode for the benefit of their $1.6M/year upstairs renters - when they’re not devolving into cartoonish name-calling), Clear The Bench Colorado has continued to attract coverage and comment from statewide and national press.

Locally, the Denver Daily News continued the coverage of Friday’s ruling against Clear The Bench Colorado in favor of the entrenched incumbents and big-money special interests represented by “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” - it’s what they do) in a cleverly (although strictly speaking, inaccurately) titled piece (”Clear The Bench benched“) in their Tuesday edition.  The article noted that the ruling “undermines transparency and accountability in judicial retention vote[s]” and concluded by quoting a CTBC statement:

“Big-money special interests will now be more prone to attempt to influence judicial retention elections behind the scenes, using vehicles other than the open and accountable ‘Issue Committee’ organization types such as Clear The Bench Colorado,” wrote Arnold.

“In fact, big-money legal establishment special-interest groups are already active this year in promoting a ‘retain’ vote for judicial incumbents,” continued Arnold. “They’re just significantly less honest about their intentions…”

Meanwhile, on the national front…

The nationally influential Wall Street Journal Political Diary featured Clear The Bench Colorado as the lead story in this week’s edition on Tuesday (”Colorado’s Bench-Clearing Brawl“), beginning:

Usually judicial elections are rubber-stamp landslides for the incumbents, but maybe not this year in Colorado. A citizens movement called “Clear the Bench Colorado” is trying to evict a majority of the state’s Supreme Court in the November elections. For a decade and a half, the court has angered many Coloradoans by handing down anti-taxpayer rulings that grow government and thwart the state constitution.

…and concluding:

If Clear the Bench succeeds in knocking off even one or two Colorado Supremes this year, judges everywhere will be put on notice that they remain accountable to We the People.

My only gripes with the otherwise well-written piece: no mention of the Clear The Bench Colorado website, and (in an apparent search for prominent names to associate with the movement) naming Jon Caldara as an “instigator” of Clear The Bench Colorado (full disclosure: although I know Jon and certainly count him among the leading supporters of CTBC, he’s not an “instigator” - “not Independence nor Backbone nor either Jo(h)n - just little ol’ me - Underdog.”  Er, Matt Arnold - shoeshine boy).

Finally, for the second time in less than a week, Clear The Bench Colorado was written up in the New York Times (online Tuesday, and in the Wednesday print edition, page A30) in another editorial targeting the temerity of mere citizens who dare hold their judges accountable via the only means available (the ballot box).  The editorial (”Fair Courts in the Cross-Fire“) peddles the party line of how the pristine and apolitical courts are being sullied by crass mammon (cold hard cash) being spent on judicial races:

Now the lavish spending by interest groups and the politicization of state court judgeships is spreading from races between two or more judicial candidates to the “retention” ballots that were supposed to shield judges from the rough-and-tumble of the election cycle.

Of course, the editorial fails to mention the pesky fact that their source - the George Soros funded “Justice At Stake Campaign” - has spent over $45 Million promoting a program to disenfranchise voters across the country from having a say on how they are “ruled” from the bench.  Soros and his ilk are attempting to establish control over one-third of our government by removing the possibility for citizen checks and balances - assisted by the unwitting dupes of several well-intentioned (but naive) organizations promoting the “merit selection & retention” process without adequate accountability, transparency, and citizen safeguards.

The editorial also fails to mention the tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) spent by legal establishment special-interest groups comprised of the very lawyers appearing before the judges they are supporting in office (posing an enormous potential for undue influence and quid pro quo corruption).

In Colorado, the state Bar Association (COBAR) has already spent over $50,000 this last month (by their own admission) joining three other legal establishment special-interest groups (likely spending a similar amount, although the exact figures have not been made publicly available) in mounting an “education” campaign (electioneering without using the “magic words” of “vote yes” or “vote NO“) to prop up incumbent judges and justices.  In one month alone, they’ve spent more than CTBC has in a year. Combined, these special interests are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in television, radio, and print ads providing “nonpartisan information about the performance of judges seeking retention” that, curiously, ALL supports a “retain” vote.

NONE of these expenditures - hundreds of thousands of dollars to promote the retention of judicial incumbents in office - are transparent and accountable to the public.

The legal establishment and the political ruling class don’t want you to get informed; they prefer to keep you in the dark, or failing that, convince you NOT to exercise your 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 soon-to-be-minus 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 support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!

Media coverage of Clear The Bench Colorado, the Colorado Supreme Court, and the issue of “merit” selection & retention of judges nationwide came in a veritable torrent over the weekend, instead of trickling in over the course of a week…

Leading off the weekend’s coverage of Clear The Bench Colorado was, somewhat surprisingly, the New York Times lead editorial (by none other than NYT publisher A. G. Sulzberger himself!) online on Friday 24 September and again on page A1 of the Saturday 25 September print edition.  The editorial (”Voters Moving to Oust Judges Over Decisions“) noted:

Around the country, judicial elections that were designed to be as apolitical as possible are suddenly as contentious as any another race.

Among the three “judicial elections” profiled in the piece discussing the “merit selection system” (which Sulzberger appears to uncritically support, despite concerns about the lack of transparency and accountability in the process as it has been implemented in several states, especially Colorado):

…a conservative group called Clear the Bench Colorado is citing a host of decisions in seeking to oust the full slate of justices on the ballot there, urging voters, “Be a citizen, not a subject.”

Sulzberger bemoans the “the amount of money spent on retention elections this year” upsetting “previously quiet judicial elections” around the country.  Rather than applaud the increase in transparency and accountability now being applied to an increasingly active and powerful one-third of our government, and the exercise by citizens in many states of their constitutional right to hold incumbent government officials accountable, Sulzberger quotes an academic who maintains that the retention vote was only “meant as an extreme measure.”

However, a leader of the movement to oust Iowa justices on the ballot this year (coincidentally, also three) ably summed up the mood and motivation of the nationwide judicial accountability movement:

“It sends a powerful message,” he said, “That if justices go outside the bounds of their oaths, if the justices go outside the bounds of the U.S. and state constitutions they’re going to be held accountable.”

Meanwhile, back at the ranch…

The weekend news on the judicial (non)retention front was dominated by the stunning Friday afternoon announcement by the administrative law judge (technically, an appointed executive branch employee) hearing the series of “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” - it’s what they do) attacks on Clear The Bench Colorado that the rules under which we have operated for over a year now have to be changed.

The judge’s ruling - contrary to over a year of established practice, “reams of documentary evidence” and the testimony of the office of Secretary of State Elections Division director that Clear The Bench Colorado properly filed as an “Issue Committee” - decreed that, although we properly acted on guidance issued by the Secretary of State’s office, CTBC must RE-file as a “political committee.”  Kinda late in the game for a complete rules change, wouldn’t ya think?

The ruling can be read as an attachment to the article by Law Week Colorado (”Clear The Bench Colorado Subject To Contribution Limits, Judge Decides“), one of the first to go to press on the issue.

Around the state, the story was also covered by:

• Grand Junction Sentinel (”Judge rules against group named Clear the Bench“),
• Westword (”Colorado Ethics Watch wins Clear the Bench case, but still may have to pay some legal fees“)
• Colorado Independent (”Judge rules against Clear the Bench in campaign finance case“)
• CBS-4 Denver television (”Colo. Group Fighting Judges Loses Funding Dispute“)
• Fox-31 KDVR television (”Clear The Bench Colorado, a group fighting judges, loses funding dispute“)

Nationally, the story was picked up by:

• Associated Press (“Clear The Bench Colorado, a group fighting judges, loses funding dispute“)
• Huffington Post (”Clear The Bench Colorado Subject To Contribution Limits, Judge Decides“)
• State Politics.com (”Judge rules against Clear the Bench in campaign finance case“)
• UPI (United Press International) (”Judge rules against Clear The Bench in campaign finance case“)
• Washington Examiner (”Colo. group fighting judges loses funding dispute“)
• even the Rockford, Illinois Register-Star (”Colo. group fighting judges loses funding dispute“)

… and that’s just on Friday!

On Saturday, some news outlets expanded their coverage, including this piece by the Colorado Independent (”Gessler shocked by Clear the Bench campaign finance smackdown“) which, despite the overwrought and hyperbolic title, actually provides some insight into the case and background on the overall issues at stake.

A more sleepy (or sports-obsessed) Sunday saw one additional article:

• Eagle County Times (”Does this seem right - to you?“)

On Monday, the coverage ramped up again, with new and expanded articles:

• Westword: (”Clear the Bench’s Matt Arnold: Court win for CO Ethics Watch a victory for big $ over little guy“)
• Colorado Independent: (”Clear the Bench ruling limits donations in key weeks before election“)
• and nationally, profiled on the George Soros-funded “Justice At Stake Campaign” site: (”Colorado Ouster Group is ‘Political,’ Judge Rules“)

Curiously, despite ALL of the coverage - in print, online, on the air - statewide and nationally, Colorado’s “newspaper of record” (the Denver Post) spilled not one drop of ink covering the story.  (Perhaps they were distracted by noise from the loud and raucous celebrations upstairs by their $1.6 Million/year renters when the Colorado Supreme Court ‘unjust justices’ heard the news from real journalists).

Fortunately - despite setting a terrible precedent, and ensuring that the “big money” in judicial retention elections will continue to be non-transparent and unaccountable (such as the tens, if not hundreds, of thousands spent already by legal establishment special-interest groups promoting a “retain” campaign for judicial incumbents) - the ruling has little effect on the ongoing activities of the state’s only grassroots judicial accountability organization, Clear The Bench Colorado.

Clear The Bench Colorado has been consistently open, honest, and above-board in educating the public, and has scrupulously followed the rules under Colorado campaign finance law for over a year.  In a campaign that has been conspicuous for its LACK of big-money interests and “large contributions” (Toro is whining about two - TWO! - contributions exceeding $500), CTBC has acted with complete transparency and absolute accountability to educate voters as to their right to hold judicial incumbents accountable for their performance in office, and to shed light on the records of judicial incumbents at the highest levels - providing substantive information on which voters can base an informed decision.

The legal establishment and the political ruling class don’t want you to get informed; they prefer to keep you in the dark, or failing that, convince you NOT to exercise your 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 soon-to-be-minus 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 support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!

Judge’s ruling favors entrenched incumbents and big-money special interests

Late last Friday afternoon, Clear The Bench Colorado was stunned by the news that Administrative Law Judge Robert Spencer (as an executive branch employee, answerable to the governor and not subject to a retention vote himself) set aside the documentary evidence, testimony by Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold along with the Elections Division director at the Colorado Secretary of State’s office AND the clear letter of the law to rule in favor of “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” - it’s what they do) in what the same judge had earlier characterized as a “frivolous, groundless, & vexatious” attack (er, “campaign finance complaint”).

Despite reliance on over a year’s worth of guidance issued by the office of Secretary of State (as confirmed in numerous documents and in witness testimony provided in hearings on 15 September) reached after “numerous” internal policy meetings and much research that Clear The Bench Colorado was, is, and ought to be properly characterized as an “Issue Committee” under campaign finance rules; CTBC’s scrupulous compliance with all rules, regulations, and reporting requirements for over a year; and dismissal of CEW’s earlier complaint as “frivolous, groundless, and vexatious” - the judge changed course and found for CEW in their latest round of attacks, changing the rules in the final quarter of play.

Changing the rules at such a late date - mail ballots go out at the same time Clear The Bench Colorado has been directed to re-file as a political committee - and in direct contravention of the guidance upon which CTBC has relied for well over a year makes a mockery of the process of citizen civic engagement.  As noted by Clear The Bench Colorado lead attorney Scott Gessler,

“That’s just crazy, that ruling,” said Gessler. “What kind of crazy system is that, when you can’t trust what the Secretary of State tells you? [This ruling] means you have to hire a lawyer to do anything- to get involved at all in the political process.” (Colorado Independent, 9/25/2010)

From documentation provided by the office of Secretary of State:

Colorado campaign finance and Judicial retention

While judges are considered “candidates” for the purpose of campaign finance law in Art. XXVIII Sec. 2(2) of the Colorado Constitution, the question of the retention of a judge is a yes-or-no question.  Therefore, a committee organized for the purpose of advocating the retention or removal of a judge is advocating for a yes or no vote on that question, rather than advocating for the election or defeat of a candidate.  A committee organized for such a purpose is akin to a committee advocating for (or against) the recall of an elected official, which would register an issue committee under 1-45-108(6), C.R.S.  To that end, a committee established for the purpose of supporting or opposing the retention of a judge or judges is properly registered as an issue committee for campaign finance purposes.  Such an entity would not be considered a political committee, because political committees are established for the purpose of “support[ing] or oppos[ing] the nomination or election of one or more candidates” (Art. XXVII Sec. 2(12)(a)).  [emphasis added]

Adding insult to injury, the judge’s ruling is granting “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” - it’s what they do) more time to pay Clear The Bench Colorado what they’ve owed since July than time for Clear The Bench Colorado to re-file under “political committee” status or to appeal the ruling.

Naturally, Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” - it’s what they do) is trumpeting the ruling as a great victory, declaring in a press release Friday:

“The law does not permit a wealthy few to unduly influence the judicial retention process through large contributions against judges and justices whose rulings they don’t like.  Ethics Watch prevailed today in setting precedent to keep big money out of judicial elections…”

Ironically, the ruling “achieves” the exact opposite: big-money special interests will now be more prone to attempt to influence judicial retention elections behind the scenes, using vehicles other than the open and accountable “Issue Committee” organization types such as Clear The Bench Colorado.

In fact, big-money legal establishment special-interest groups are already active this year in promoting a “retain” vote for judicial incumbents (including, prominently, the three Colorado Supreme Court justices appearing on the ballot this year).  They’re just significantly less honest about their intentions…

In a campaign that has been conspicuous for its LACK of big-money interests and “large contributions” (Toro is whining about two - TWO! - contributions exceeding $500), acting with complete transparency and absolute accountability to educate voters as to their right to hold judicial incumbents accountable for their performance in office, and to shed light on the records of judicial incumbents at the highest levels in order to provide substantive information on which voters can base an informed decision, CEW’s attacks (and the judge’s ruling in this case) do the Colorado electorate a great disservice.

CEW’s Toro is right about one thing: “Judges are… subject to corruption” via the influence of big-money special interests keeping them in office.

The expenditure of tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) by legal establishment special-interest groups comprised of the very lawyers appearing before the judges they are supporting in office is much more likely to exert “undue influence” and raise the potential for “quid pro quo” corruption.

The Colorado Bar Association (COBAR) has already spent over $50,000 this last month (by their own admission) joining three other legal establishment special-interest groups (likely spending a similar amount, although the exact figures have not been made publicly available) in mounting an “education” campaign (electioneering without using the “magic words” of “vote yes” or “vote NO“) to prop up incumbent judges and justices.  In one month alone, they’ve spent more than CTBC has in a year. Combined, these special interests are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in television, radio, and print ads providing “nonpartisan information about the performance of judges seeking retention” that, curiously, ALL supports a “retain” vote.

Another effort, sponsored by prominent Democrat attorney Mark Grueskin and other partisan attorneys (the “Colorado Judiciary Project”) is also spending large amounts (again, because this group formed as a “social welfare organization” their expenditures are NOT publicly available) supporting the judicial incumbents before whom they argue cases.  Conflict of interest?  Nah!

Ironically, these legal special-interest efforts come on top of hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars used to produce and distribute the one-sided and shallow “reviews” perpetrated by the (taxpayer-funded) commissions on judicial performance evaluation - which, again, advocate 100% of the time to “retain” Colorado Supreme Court justices in office.

NONE of these expenditures - hundreds of thousands of dollars to promote the retention of judicial incumbents in office - are transparent and accountable to the public.

Did Friday’s ruling really succeed in “setting precedent to keep big money out of judicial elections…”?

Hardly.   It just provided cover for the big money that’s already comfortably ensconced in the process - erecting additional roadblocks to shedding light on the fact, and restoring accountability to the judiciary.

Clear The Bench Colorado has been consistently open, honest, and above-board in educating the public, and has scrupulously followed the rules under Colorado campaign finance law for over a year.  Forcing CTBC to re-file under a different set of rules - changed in the final quarter - is a mockery of justice.

Yet another reason that now more than ever - it’s time to Clear The Bench, Colorado!

The legal establishment and the political ruling class don’t want you to get informed; they prefer to keep you in the dark, or failing that, convince you NOT to exercise your 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 soon-to-be-minus 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 support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!

Colorado voters are being bombarded with a series of ads (on radio, television, and online) promoting the “evaluations” of incumbent judges and justices conducted by the various “Commissions on Judicial Performance Evaluation” at both district and state levels.  This so-called “education campaign” funded by legal establishment special-interest groups is spending tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars to convince Coloradans that “all is well” with the judicial system in Colorado.

Over the decades-long history of the “performance review” commissions, they have NOT ONCE recommended a “do not retain” vote for a Colorado Supreme Court justice (historically, that’s a 100% endorsement of the incumbent); the commissions have NOT ONCE recommended a “do not retain” vote for any Colorado Court of Appeals judge (again, a 100% endorsement); and the commissions have only very rarely (16 times, counting this year) recommended a “do not retain” vote for ANY judge at ANY level (an astounding 99% endorsement rate).  According to these “evaluations” there is no need to remove ANY of the incumbent judges or justices appearing on the ballot this year.  ”Move along - nothing to see here.”

Even Fidel Castro or the late Saddam Hussein didn’t receive that level of “retain” votes…

Clear The Bench Colorado has previously noted deficiencies in the “evaluations” generated by the “judicial performance review” process; the State Commission on Judicial Performance (the commission “reviewing performance” of Colorado Supreme Court justices and Colorado Court of Appeals judges) this year continued their decades-long pattern of 100% “retain” recommendations by endorsing incumbent Colorado Supreme Court justices Bender, Martinez, and Rice despite their consistent pattern of disregarding clear constitutional language in a succession of rulings, and many of the other commissions have similarly failed in their duty to provide substantive, useful information on which Colorado voters can base an informed decision.

A recent Law Week article highlighted the failure of the 8th Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance to hold two Larimer County judges - guilty of conspiring to hide evidence which sent an innocent man to jail for 10 years - accountable for their past performance:

On Aug. 3, Blair and Gilmore were unanimously recommended for retention by the Larimer County Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission. The commission acknowledged the concerns over the Masters case, including the public censure both judges received from the state Supreme Court’s presiding disciplinary judge for failing to ensure Masters’ defense counsel received potentially helpful evidence, but stated that “the community is well served” by the judges continued presence on the bench.

“Well-served” by the continued presence on the bench of judges who have demonstrated a lack of integrity and ethical behavior which resulted in sending an innocent man to jail for 10 YEARS?

Defense attorney Erik Fischer (who had defended Tim Masters) commented:

I think we would be better served by having them continue to serve in a different capacity than as judges.”

Perhaps having them “serve” in the “different capacity” of making license plates might be more appropriate…

According to the language of the so-called “evaluations” included in the commission reports,

The Commission was charged with evaluating Judge Blair [and Judge Gilmore] on integrity [emphasis added], legal knowledge, communication skills, judicial temperament, administrative performance and service to the legal profession and the public.

Read for yourself the commission’s “performance evaluation” of Judge Blair along with the commission’s “performance evaluation” of Judge Gilmore - then decide for yourself if the commission recommendation to “retain” these judges in office passes the “smell” test.

Colorado voters have been ill-served by the lack of critical review and evaluation of judicial performance for decades.  The Colorado Commissions on Judicial Performance Evaluation, in failing to provide substantive information that differentiates between judges who rule consistently in accordance with the law (and Colorado DOES have many GOOD judges) and those who don’t - or who demonstrate other serious deficiencies in character or performance - are contributing to increased citizen skepticism about our judges, our courts, and the rule of law generally.  Undermining citizen confidence in the rule of law is corrosive to a society - if we are not reasonably assured that ALL citizens will receive fair, equal, and impartial treatment by our courts - applying the law, as written (not making it up as they go along, to suit the judge’s personal preference or political agenda) people will pursue justice by other means.

Clear The Bench Colorado calls upon attorneys of integrity (we know you’re out there somewhere), journalists with a sense of justice, and other people of principle to Sound Off! in true defense of our system of justice - by holding accountable those judges and justices who have failed in their duty to support the Constitution and uphold the rule of law.

Become an informed voter; conduct your own evaluation of the performance of these justices, based on how (and whether) they follow the Constitution and uphold the rule of law.  Armed with information, Yes, you can exercise your right to vote “NO” on the four (er, now three) ‘unjust justices’ of the Mullarkey Majority (Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and soon to be minus 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 homes and business from seizure by abuse of eminent domain, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.”  Support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and your contributions - and vote “NO” on retaining these unjust justices in the November elections!

Apparently “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” - it’s what they do) has more than just ethical issues…

After decisively losing to Clear The Bench Colorado on a bogus attack (er, “campaign finance complaint”) filed on 5 May 2010 - being roundly rebuked (and ordered to pay attorneys fees) by the judge hearing the case on 21 July 2010, CEW launched another attack (er, filed a “supplemental complaint“) heard by the same judge this last Wednesday (15 September 2010).  Since Wednesday’s hearing represented the close of costs associated with the original complaint (which continued to mount up after CEW was ordered to pay) they were presented with a demand for payment of the money they owe for their frivolous, groundless, & vexatious attack (er, “complaint”) to Clear The Bench Colorado.

Late Monday evening (via our attorneys, who received it late Monday afternoon) we received word that “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” - it’s what they do) is requesting a delay in payment.  Apparently, the legal artifice is termed a request for an “Enlargement in time” - commonly a day or two to give the beancounters enough time to vet the validity of billable items, hours, etc.

However, “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” - it’s what they do) apparently needs LOTS of “Enlargement” - they’ve requested another three-plus weeks (until October 15^{th -} um, seriously? In the crunch time of a campaign?) to pay Clear The Bench Colorado what they’ve owed us since July.

Sounds like a personal problem to me…

Is “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” - it’s what they do) unable to get it up - or simply unwilling?  After all, with the massive amounts of funding they receive from their parent organization (Washington, DC based CREW) and from local leftist funders Tim Gill, Pat Stryker, Jared Polis, and Rutt Bridges right here in Colorado, it’s not like they can’t draw on deep reservoirs of cash.

CEW’s failure to “man up” and pay what they owe in a timely manner fits a pattern of petty harassment and vexatious attacks designed to sling mud, divert attention, and (most importantly) tie up resources.  They’re not overly concerned with presenting a valid argument (or even winning) - as long as they can succeed in distracting, diverting, and denying time, attention, and money to their opponent, they win (even when - as in this case - they lose, and decisively).

By refusing to knuckle under to these slimy tactics - and winning (because we’re smarter, better prepared, and much better looking) - Clear The Bench Colorado has advanced the cause of justice for everyone wishing to participate in public debate (and we did it without enhancements).

Stand firm with Clear The Bench Colorado - erect and tall - in defense of our constitutional rights.  Exercise your rights to hold our unelected Colorado Supreme Court justices accountable to the law - vote “NO” on the three incumbent ‘unjust justices’ of the Mullarkey Court seeking another 10-year term in office this November.  Clear The Bench, Colorado!

Be a citizen, not a subject - get informed, then exercise your 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 soon-to-be-minus 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 support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term

Scouring the ‘net for news - so you don’t have to…

Wrapping up the previous week’s news coverage, the Greeley Gazette published a thoughtful and informative article (”Organization Calls for Non-Retention of Three Colorado Justices“, Friday 10 September 2010) discussing how the Colorado Supreme Court’s Mullarkey Majority (incumbent justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, and Nancy Rice - the “Three Colorado Justices” seeking another 10-year term on the November ballot - plus outgoing Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey, who is resigning rather than be held accountable by Colorado voters)

circumvented the Colorado Constitution on several occasions and should not be retained.

The article describes the key cases in which the Colorado Supreme Court ruled contrary to the clear letter of the Colorado Constitution and violated the rights of Colorado Citizens over the last decade (which is the current term of the incumbent justices appearing on the November ballot).

The Colorado Statesman also published an article Friday (”Ritter picks Marquez for state Supreme Court“) that highlighted concerns about how Marquez’ background might influence her rulings as a supreme court justice:

Many of the positions taken by Marquez on constitutional issues raise concerns about how she might rule from the Colorado Supreme Court bench, Arnold said.

“Marquez advocated in favor of the 2003 judicial takeover of legislative redistricting authority in the Salazar v. Davidson redistricting case, argued that “fees” are not taxes in the Barber v. Ritter case (which led to the 2009 Colorado Car Tax - er, vehicle registration “fee” - increases), and has sought to restrict the 1st Amendment rights of citizens seeking to speak out on ballot issues in recent and ongoing cases. She is also the lead attorney in yet another attempt to impose an unconstitutional tax increase on Colorado citizens,” Arnold said.

A Denver Post commentary published in the days immediately following Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey’s announcement of her intent to resign (”Mullarkey’s Troubling Legacy“, Denver Post opinion 5 June 2010) made similar points, but unfortunately neglected to mention that Mullarkey didn’t perpetrate these constitutional crimes on her own, but was aided and abetted in these misdeeds by three accomplices who are appearing on the ballot this November).

Instead, the Denver Post editorial board chose to commemorate 9/11 by calling a military veteran a “skunk” for daring to express concerns (based on a career background of advocacy and a lack of judicial experience) about Governor Ritter’s pick for Mullarkey’s replacement while failing to mention her (Marquez) role in these cases.

Clear The Bench Colorado started off the week last Sunday evening (9/12) with an in-studio appearance on Backbone Radio to discuss the Colorado Supreme Court, Colorado’s “merit selection & retention” system of nominating and evaluating judges, and Governor Ritter’s recently announced pick to replace outgoing Chief Justice Mullarkey, who is resigning rather than be held accountable by Colorado voters.  Producer Josh Sharf also had fun with bumper clips parodying the previous day’s (9/11) Denver Post editorial calling Clear The Bench Colorado Director (and decorated military veteran) Matt Arnold a “skunk” (in what was either a childish cheap shot or “epic fail” attempt at humor):

“Yet there always has to be a skunk at the garden party, and this time the role of Pepe Le Pew was played by Matt Arnold of Clear the Bench Colorado, a group that wants voters to oust all of the justices who are up for retention this year.”

Backbone Radio host Ross Kaminsky had also blogged on the subject of Governor Ritter’s pick politicizing the judicial system on Saturday as well.

A week full of public speaking appearances started off strong when Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold kicked off the week as the lead-off speaker at the “We ARE The People” rally at the Denver Capitol on Monday.  Matt received some of the most thunderous applause of the day (a late-arriving attendee said that it was loud and clear for several blocks) as he reminded the crowd about the serial transgressions of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority” against the Colorado Constitution (leading to the “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” property tax increase, the “Dirty Dozen” tax increases and of course the Colorado Car Tax (er, “vehicle registration fee”) increase) and our opportunity to remove the remaining three ‘unjust justices’ at the ballot box in November.  Curiously, despite the fact that the rally was just up the street from the Denver Post building (and well within auditory range), the Post published nary a word about the rally and the challenge to the Colorado Supreme Court incumbents (apparently $1.6 Million a year is a lot of hush money).  The Denver Daily News ran the story on their front page (along with a nice pic) the next day (”Liberty Groups Seek Unity“):

Clear the Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold speaks at the liberty groups’ “We Are the People” rally yesterday at the State Capitol. Photo by Jamie Cotton, Law Week Colorado.

The speech was covered by State Bill Colorado (”Broomfield 9/12 Rally Taking Place At Colo. Capitol“):

Prominent at the rally are members of Clear The Bench Colorado, a political group hoping to win voter non-retention of three Supreme Court justices in the November election.

but not a peep from the Post (Colorado’s “newspaper of record”).

The big news (and time sink) for Clear The Bench Colorado came midweek with the “clash in the courtroom” on Wednesday: CEW Round Two.  ”Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” - it’s what they do) had their day in court (again) attacking the right of Clear The Bench Colorado to oppose the incumbent Colorado Supreme Court ‘unjust justices’ appearing on the November ballot.  Although the judge did not immediately grant our motion to dismiss the attack, CEW’s case later came completely unraveled when the State Elections Director (from the office of the Colorado Secretary of State) stated unequivocally that it was the considered opinion of the Secretary of State’s office - following several internal policy meetings and much discussion - that Clear The Bench Colorado is properly categorized as an “Issue Committee” (which CEW is challenging).  Further, he stated that it was an almost unanimous opinion shared up to and including the highest levels.  He further stated that although the office does not provide legal advice, it “provides guidance all the time” - and that people are reasonably expected to rely on the guidance issued (in whatever form - verbal, written, publicized, or otherwise) by the Secretary of State’s office.

One could have heard a pin drop in the courtroom after those statements - CEW was flat on the mat.

Law Week Colorado covered the early part of the hearing (before the Secretary of State office’s bombshell), providing an overview and background on the case (”Clear The Bench Colorado Hearing Going On Today“), which was also picked up by the Huffington Post (the HuffPo has been tracking Clear The Bench Colorado with a unique “tag” for about a year now).  ”Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” - it’s what they do) attempted (desperately) to put their own spin on the hearing later (”Ethics Watch’s Fight Against Big Money In Judicial Elections Goes To Court“) - which is completely laughable, given the “big money” funding CEW, the “big money” funding the “Grueskin group” opposing Clear The Bench Colorado, the “big money” behind the “education” campaign by a coalition of legal-establishment special-interest groups propping up incumbent judges and justices, the “big money” (YOUR taxpayer dollars at work, by the way) funding the whitewash “evaluations” perpetrated by the “judicial performance evaluation commissions” (recommending a “retain” vote EVERY time - 100% - for supreme court justices in the decades-long history of the commissions), etc. etc.  The “Big Money” is already in judicial politics - just all on the side of the incumbents. (Stay tuned for more on that topic…)

Later that evening, at a Liberty On The Rocks gathering featuring Denver Post Editorial Board member Chuck Plunkett, friends of Clear The Bench Colorado (I was unable to attend in person) presented him with an autographed picture of Pepe Le Pew (suitable for framing).  Chuck took it in good humor:

Powered By: VideoBuzz

Oh, so calling a veteran a “skunk” on 9/11 was a formatting issue…

Still awaiting the Denver Post Editorial Board invitation to discuss the Colorado Supreme Court retention elections (the MOST important issue on this year’s ballot) that they’ve offered to every other statewide race or ballot question…

Meanwhile, across the country, the issue of judicial retention elections is gaining serious attention.  The National Law Journal ran two pieces in the space of a week (first, a September 6th guest commentary, “Is justice for sale?” and a September 13th report “Battlegrounds” - the latter unfortunately restricted to subscribers only), both mentioning Clear The Bench Colorado.  From the former article:

Bread-and-butter economic issues are also fueling attacks on judges. A group called Clear the Bench Colorado is attacking four justices it accuses of using underhanded tactics to ratify higher taxes.

The latter article also characterized Clear The Bench Colorado as an “anti-tax group” despite an extensive interview and follow-up message describing the entire range of constitutional transgressions perpetrated by the court:

In Colorado, an anti-tax group has started a campaign called “Clear the Bench” in an effort to defeat incumbent justices.

Characterizing critiques of judicial performance as “attacks on judges” and narrowing the basis for the critiques as “anti-tax” fits the narrative perpetrated by the legal establishment, but not the facts.  Citizens are becoming increasingly fed up with politicized courts refusing to uphold their constitutional rights and the rule of law - and are demanding accountability across the country.

Seeing their dominance of the courts threatened, the “progressive” legal establishment is conducting a media “blitz” to convince voters that they should not exercise their right to hold judges (and, especially, state supreme court justices) accountable by the only means available: the ballot box.  The New York Times recently editorialized (”Fair Courts At Risk“, NYT 9/9/2010) against electoral accountability for judges; the Huffington Post chimed in a few days later (13 Sep 2010) with commentary advancing a similar agenda (”Elected Justice“).  Both articles (and similar pieces) parroted talking points released by the George-Soros funded “Justice At Stake Campaign” (another big-money group which is attempting to erode public accountability for the judicial branch nationwide).

The legal establishment and the political ruling class don’t want you to get informed; they prefer to keep you in the dark, or failing that, convince you NOT to exercise your 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 soon-to-be-minus 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 support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!

The resurgence of “We The People” in the form of local citizens banding together in grassroots civic action organizations to defend our constitutional rights is THE continuing political story of the year 2010 in America and is profoundly affecting Colorado Politics in this year and beyond…

Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold is both proud and humbled to have been invited as a guest speaker to several such groups over the last several months - beginning with the massive (7000+) crowd at the first Tax Day Tea Party rally at the Denver Capitol and continuing through several events throughout the Spring (examples here, and here), Summer (examples here, here, and here) Fall (examples here, here, here, here, and here) and Winter (examples here, and here) of 2009 - we’re back for more in 2010, most prominently at the Tax Day Tea Party rallies on April 15th.

Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold discusses the impact of Colorado Supreme Court rulings leading to a massive expansion of government power (at the expense of YOUR constitutional rights) and vastly increased taxation (such as the “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” property tax increase, the “Dirty Dozen” tax increases and of course the Colorado Car Tax (er, “vehicle registration fee”) increase, along with the dominant role of the Colorado Supreme Court in determining our legislative district boundaries (including both the State and Federal level - deciding how YOU will be represented in Congress and in the Colorado Legislature) and the issue of judicial retention elections for the Colorado Supreme Court following the announcement by Chief Justice Mullarkey that she would resign rather than be held accountable by Colorado voters - at the Southern Colorado Tea Party meeting Thursday (6PM).

The Colorado Supreme Court - and particularly, the Chief Justice - exercises enormous power (”clout”) over the lives of Colorado citizens.  The current majority has repeatedly demonstrated that it does not exercise this power with restraint or consideration for your constitutional rights - ruling consistently against individual protections and in favor of expanded government power.  Upholding tax increases (such as the “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” property tax increase, or the “Dirty Dozen” new tax laws) imposed without the required vote of the people, enabling taxes to be collected under the guise of “fees” (such as the Colorado Car Tax), expanding eminent domain abuse to seize people’s property, and grabbing the (legislative) power to draw up voting districts (aided by the recent “Mary-mandering” bill) - this court is acting like rulers, with you as the subjects; re-writing the laws, instead of upholding them.

Be a citizen, not a subject - get informed, then exercise your 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 soon-to-be-minus 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 support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!

Clear The Bench Colorado discusses the impact of Colorado Supreme Court rulings leading to a massive expansion of government power (at the expense of YOUR constitutional rights) and vastly increased taxation (such as the “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” property tax increase, the “Dirty Dozen” tax increases and of course the Colorado Car Tax (er, “vehicle registration fee”) increase, along with the dominant role of the Colorado Supreme Court in determining the boundaries of our legislative districts (at both the State and Federal level - deciding how YOU will be represented in Congress and in the Colorado Legislature) and the issue of judicial retention elections for the Colorado Supreme Court following the recent announcement by Chief Justice Mullarkey that she would resign rather than be held accountable by Colorado voters -at the Douglas County Republican Women’s luncheon Wednesday.

The Colorado Supreme Court - and particularly, the Chief Justice - exercises enormous power (”clout”) over the lives of Colorado citizens.  The current majority has repeatedly demonstrated that it does not exercise this power with restraint or consideration for your constitutional rights - ruling consistently against individual protections and in favor of expanded government power.  Upholding tax increases (such as the “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” property tax increase, or the “Dirty Dozen” new tax laws) imposed without the required vote of the people, enabling taxes to be collected under the guise of “fees” (such as the Colorado Car Tax), expanding eminent domain abuse to seize people’s property, and grabbing the (legislative) power to draw up voting districts (aided by the recent “Mary-mandering” bill) - this court is acting like rulers, with you as the subjects; re-writing the laws, instead of upholding them.

Be a citizen, not a subject - get informed, then exercise your 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 soon-to-be-minus 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 support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!

The resurgence of “We The People” in the form of local citizens banding together in grassroots civic action organizations to defend our constitutional rights is THE continuing political story of the year 2010 in America and is profoundly affecting Colorado Politics in this year and beyond…

Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold is both proud and humbled to have been invited as a guest speaker to several such groups over the last several months - beginning with the massive (7000+) crowd at the first Tax Day Tea Party rally at the Denver Capitol and continuing through several events throughout the Spring (examples here, and here), Summer (examples here, here, and here) Fall (examples here, here, here, here, and here) and Winter (examples here, and here) of 2009 - we’re back for more in 2010, most prominently at the Tax Day Tea Party rallies on April 15th.

Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold discusses the impact of Colorado Supreme Court rulings leading to a massive expansion of government power (at the expense of YOUR constitutional rights) and vastly increased taxation (such as the “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” property tax increase, the “Dirty Dozen” tax increases and of course the Colorado Car Tax (er, “vehicle registration fee”) increase, along with the dominant role of the Colorado Supreme Court in determining our legislative district boundaries (including both the State and Federal level - deciding how YOU will be represented in Congress and in the Colorado Legislature) and the issue of judicial retention elections for the Colorado Supreme Court following the announcement by Chief Justice Mullarkey that she would resign rather than be held accountable by Colorado voters - at Monday’s We Are The People rally (Denver Capitol west steps starting at 11AM)

The Colorado Supreme Court - and particularly, the Chief Justice - exercises enormous power (”clout”) over the lives of Colorado citizens.  The current majority has repeatedly demonstrated that it does not exercise this power with restraint or consideration for your constitutional rights - ruling consistently against individual protections and in favor of expanded government power.  Upholding tax increases (such as the “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” property tax increase, or the “Dirty Dozen” new tax laws) imposed without the required vote of the people, enabling taxes to be collected under the guise of “fees” (such as the Colorado Car Tax), expanding eminent domain abuse to seize people’s property, and grabbing the (legislative) power to draw up voting districts (aided by the recent “Mary-mandering” bill) - this court is acting like rulers, with you as the subjects; re-writing the laws, instead of upholding them.

Be a citizen, not a subject - get informed, then exercise your 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 soon-to-be-minus 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 support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!