Recent Developments New (October 27, 2025) The American Bar Association Journal published a story related to allegations of Colorado judicial corruption. It leads off with this headline: "Former judicial ethics chief files suit claiming Colorado justices, other officials conspired to hide misconduct." This is one of the latest developments as the Masias Contract Scandal continues to reverberate in Colorado judicial circles. Read the article here: Former judicial ethics chief files suit . . . New (October 2025) New rules for judicial discipline proceedings are being adopted. Link to our section on the The rulemaking process is underway. Access the recent rules and public comments, including extensive comments submitted by former executive director of Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline. Rulemaking Links to Public Comments Recent Addition (August 20, 2024) Access the detailed and complete Request for Evaluation filed relating to the Masias Contract Scandal Link to Request for Evaluation re: Masias Contract Scandal New (July 24, 2025) FEEDBACK from Christopher Gregory System skewed to benefit disciplined judges FEEDBACK: System skewed to benefit disciplined judges New (June 27, 2025) Letter to Editor: Judicial reforms are in place 2025-06-27 Letter re Judicial reforms are in place.pdf New (June 15, 2025) Opinion by former executive director of Colorado Commission for Judicial Discipline, Christopher Gregory. Perspective - Above the Law New (May 7, 2025) Senate rejects Colorado judicial discipline appointee while approving another Read Story at Colorado Politics New (May 6, 2025) Colorado Senate committee balks at governor's judicial discipline nominations. Read story here New (May 1, 2025) OPINION: Colorado's highest court has lost credibility. A comprehensive, behind-the-scenes, insider look at Colorado judicial politics at the highest level. Continue reading at this link . . .

Judge Ross Buchanan "Even when a judge breaks the rules, we can't know about it -- even though they supposedly work for us in an open government." Story "The panel inadvertently revealed [that Judge Buchanan] last year was the subject of a private reprimand" Story More Commentary Story Recommended for retention by voters To Evaluation

Evaluating Judges: Performance Commissions Each judge faces a vote of the public on whether they should be retained in office 2 years after being appointed and at regular intervals after that (4, 6, 8, or 10 years depending on the court). Colorado created performance commissions to help voters decide whether to keep the judge on the bench. The commission evaluates the information available to it and reports its recommendations to the voters in the bluebook. In theory, the commissions provide accountability that is independent of influence by the judiciary or outside politics. Does the system below do that? Review the Cases & Controversies examples of judicial misconduct. Can you find one where a judicial performance commission warned voters about a misbehaving judge? Cases & Controversies The members of the Judicial Performance Commissions are lawyers and nonlawyers as well as members of each major political party. The state supreme court influences the selection of members. Also, each commission meets privately with the chief judge of the district at the start of their work. Reports After reviewing the information available to it, the Performance Commission prepares a report summarizing the judge's performance. And it provides its recommendation to Colorado voters on whether the judge meets performance guidelines and should stay on the bench. The report and recommendation is published to voters in the voter's guide ("bluebook"). How effective are Performance Commission evaluations? Go To Story Story As this is written and an election approaches, we voters in Colorado have no idea ho w these investigations came out. As you cast your vote for or against a judge, do you wonder if the judge was investigated? Was that judge cleared or did they break the law they are supposed to be applying to others? Why doesn't the bluebook tell you? Regarding the high ratings given to Colorado judges . . . "In ... Lake Woebegon, all the children were above average --- statistically impossible." To Commentary Jon Caldara, Columnist Go To Story Go To Story "Did you vote to retain the judge [disciplined last year] who promoted extensive drinking among court staff, which led to a sexual relationship with a staff member?" Expose the records of Colorado's judges , Gazette Commentary by Chris Forsyth, October 28, 2020 Go To Story Go To Story In 2023, the Discipline Commission reported that it had taken "corrective action" against 250 judges throughout its history. How many of these "corrections" were known to the Performance Commissions for its review or by voters when they cast their votes? 2022 Annual Report, Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline at 21-22. Go To Report Tim Masters was wrongfully convicted of murder in Fort Collins, Colorado. Two prosecutors in the case would ultimately be disciplined for misconduct. While the allegations of misconduct were pending, the two passed Nominating Commission vetting to become judges. They were then endorsed by the Performance Commission for retention. However, voters overruled the Nominating Commission and Performance Commission recommendations, removing both from office. Was this the system working or its failings being overcome by the voters? Learn More For more information about the process, visit the Performance Commission's website Performance Commission Website

Transparency February 2021 August 2022 Compare "we need to ensure that any allegation of wrongdoing is fully investigated and if wrongdoing is found, that there is full accountability regardless of anyone's position." - Chief Justice Brian Boatright, February 4, 2021 To Story "The people of Colorado deserve a judiciary that they know is being held accountable ... regardless of title or position." Chief Justice Boatright, February 16, 2021 To Story "If you didn't have these whistle-blowers and ... press ..., where might this have landed?" - quoting State Senate President Garcia Story To Story To Story Secret Revealed One Cost To Story To Story To Story "We urge the Colorado Judicial Department to be fully transparent" -- Statement of the Colorado Bar Association, February 11, 2021 To Story Compare February 2021 "Today, we met as a court and viewed the memo for the first time ." - official statement by Colorado Supreme Court -February 8, 2021 (emphasis supplied) June 2022 To Story In 2020, the State Auditor found an "appearance of impropriety" in contracting with Masias. To Story It did so without the now infamous Memo, which had been withheld from the Auditor until 2021. To Story "Colorado's Judicial branch is the 'black ops' of government." To Story To the Editorial "The memo itself was secret for almost two years, until ... Ryan blew the whistle" To Story To Story February 2021 Compare August 2022 "nobody wants these investigations to go forward more than I do ... My promise ... to all of Colorado ... We're going to get this right." -Chief Justice Brian Boatright 2/16/21 To Story To Story February 2021 Compare July 2022 "we are retaining the services of an outside investigator to conduct an independent review of all of the allegations mentioned in the memo ." - Colo Supreme Court, February 2, 2021 "[Memo Item 5] 'Current pending EEOC complaint against two justice [of the supreme court]' [Judiciary's Investigator] ILG was instructed not to investigate this matter" -Chief Justice Boatright, July 11, 2022 To Story February 2021 August 2022 "I am committed to getting to the truth of the allegations that have damaged the public's perception of our critically important work." -Chief Justice Brian Boatright February 18, 2021 To Story Compare To Story To Story To Story "[Settled] lawsuit ... alleges officials failed to investigate and then retaliated against a judicial assistant who reported that a judge sexually assaulted ... her." "Executive director calls lack of records matching recent revelations 'puzzling.'" To Law Week To Story "Every woman that [brings forward mistreatment] -- they've all been laid off, written up, disciplined, pushed out, moved over ..." To Story "Supreme Court Justice Richard Gabriel faced sexual harassment accusation while a candidate for Colorado's high court--Agreement with accuser kept the issue from tainting his chances, memo says" This was the headline in the Denver Post on 2/26/2021. The detailed original story is now difficult to find. It was replaced with a statement that the charges were later determined to be "unfounded." This refers to the report of the Judicial Dept.'s lawyers, ILG. Is the unavailability of the original detailed story a reflection of transparency or the power of the Justice to suppress the story? After a careful review of the Memo's accusation, the original story, and the objective facts stated by ILG: Was the allegation founded or unfounded? Was the harassment claim suppressed? Was the removal of the story consistent or inconsistent with the original accusation in the Memo? Learn More View Story While it Lasts To Story "given the climate of fear and intimidation that had been created ... employees never voiced their concerns." To Story "I didn't want to create a paper trail for the chief [justice], so I'll trust you'll know the best way to keep him informed." To Story To Story To Story To Story To Story To Story "[the investigator] found ... employees 'broadly feared' retaliation for filing misconduct complaints" To Story To Story "Judicial controlled the ... [investigation] contracts" To Story "What can you do with a redacted report? It was a setup from the start." To Story

Judge Laurie Booras To Story To Evaluation

Judge Ryan Kamada To Document Story Story Story

Judge Andrew Armatas also known as "JudgeTouchy Feely" This judge's misbehavior was so well known in the judiciary that the staff had a nickname for him. Instead of stopping it, they protected the judge. When a staff member complained about the sexual harassment, she was fired in retaliation. The judiciary didn't even feel the need to hide their purpose in punishing her for complaining about the harassment. Even though they had to pay damages, did the judiciary consider the judge's sexual harassment to be unethical? Can you find any record of him being censured? To Story To Story To Evaluation

Judge Natalie Chase Judge Chase was censured and resigned after agreeing that she had breached ethical standards relating to using racist language. This case illustrates a challenge to a court system of what to do with cases when decisions affecting people's lives are tainted by the judge's bigotry. Colorado's courts did little to correct those tainted decisions, some of which removed children of color from their families. In her last evaluation, the Judicial Performance Commission unanimously recommended to voters that Judge Chase be retained. Story Story To Story Story Story Story The "court has waved aside the notion that the racial bias of a ... judge deprived a Black defendant of his constitutional rights ..." Story Story Story To Evaluation

Selecting Judges in Colorado: Nominating Commissions Each judicial district in the state has a nominating commission to nominate three candidates for any judicial opening in that district. A separate statewide commission selects appellate nominees. Commission members are a mix of lawyers and nonlawyers balanced between the political parties. In theory, the nominating commissions exist to insulate the rule of law from politics and influence. Every commission is chaired and directed by a justice of the state supreme court. The result is that the Colorado Supreme Court has direct influence over the process through its authority to appoint commission members and chair commission meetings. Judges and the justices also routinely endorse individual applicants. Picking the Judge The nominating commission sends 2-3 candidates to the governor. The governor then selects from among them, appointing a judge to fill the vacancy. Justices and judges routinely lobby for preferred nominees in this final selection stage. How effective is the screening done by Nominating Commissions? Go To Story Go To Story Tim Masters was wrongfully convicted of murder in Fort Collins, CO. Two prosecutors in the case would ultimately be disciplined for misconduct. While the allegations of their misconduct were pending, the two passed Nominating Commission vetting to become judges. However, voters overruled the Nomination Commission and removed both from office. Was this the system working or were its failings being overcome by the voters? Go To Story Go To Story In 2022, seven years after the Nominating Commission process finished, the lawyers hired by the judiciary would declare, without interviewing the accuser, that the 2013 allegations of harassment were "unfounded." Review the substance of their report in the "Reports" section of this site and decide for yourself if that conclusion is supported. Regardless of a 2022 conclusion, did the Nomination Commission process function adequately half a dozen years earlier when they were never informed of the allegations? Go To Story In 2023, the Colorado Judicial Discipline Commission reported that, throughout the history of the commission, 85 judges had stepped down in the face of ethics charges. That does not count the type of cases reported above. All of them had been endorsed by the Nominating Commission process. -Source : 2022 Annual Report, Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline, p. 22 For more information about the nominating process, visit the Nominating Commissions' website Nominating Commission Website

Judge John Scipione As with others, Judge Scipione's case involved years of misbehavior before any action was taken. Like the other judges, in his last evaluation, the Judicial Performance Commission recommended that voters retain Judge Scipione. To Story To Story In 2021, news reporting on the Masias allegations addressed a judicial applicant who failed to disclose misconduct allegations. That news story is now difficult to find. In 2022, Judge Scipione was disciplined for failing to make disclosures in his application to be a judge. Since then, the Colorado Supreme Court has removed the question from the application to be a judge. 2021 Story Questionaire Story To Story To Evaluation

The Discipline Commission reports that it has taken "corrective action" with more than 250 judges. Few of these judges needing "correction" are ever revealed to the public. Every now and then, the Discipline Commission will describe a disciplined judge by misconduct but not name them. Are you about to vote for that judge? You have no way of knowing. Annual Report "Did you vote to retain the judge [disciplined last year] who promoted extensive drinking among court staff, which led to a sexual relationship with a staff member?" Expose the records of Colorado's judges, Gazette Commentary by Chris Forsyth, October 28, 2020 Link to Commentary Did this judge decide sexual harassment cases when they were involved in this workplace affair gone bad? Are those decisions tainted by the judge's personal interests? Did the parties ever receive notice of a possible basis for appeal?

Ethics Enforcement: Commission on Judicial Discipline The Colorado constitution created a commission on judicial discipline and made it responsible for investigating allegations that a judge violated ethics rules. The commission investigates allegations and prosecutes these charges. Membership Commission members are drawn from judges, lawyers, and non-lawyers selected by the governor and the supreme court. Recommendations The commission makes recommendations about discipline to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court makes the final decision on whether and how to discipline a judge. Secrecy Discipline Commission proceedings are secret. If a judge is found to have violated the ethics rules, their discipline can be public or private. If private, the violation remains a secret. Only if the Supreme Court approves public discipline will it be known to voters. How effective is the discipline process? "For 28 continuous years, there was no public judicial discipline in Colorado." The Judicial Integrity Project commentary Go To Story 2019-2023: The Discipline Commission issued 3 times as many sanctions as in all of the prior half-century. SMART Hearing SMART Hearing Testimony, Discipline Commission, 1/18/23 Go To Story Go To Story Go To Story Go To Story Go To Story Go To Story Go To Story Go To Story Go To Story For more information about the process, visit the Discipline Commission's website Link to Discipline Commission Website