By Jen Schumann | Contributor, Rocky Mountain Voice
Even though retired Colorado 10th Judicial District Chief Judge Dennis Maes has plenty to do as a board member for Pueblo School District, he writes monthly articles on the need for judicial reform.
And behind the scenes, he acts when he observes actions that throw the question of judicial transparency and accountability into question. He’s also gone to multiple news media outlets to air his concerns.
Maes believes that the work of investigative journalists around the state, including the Denver Gazette’s David Migoya, led to Amendment H appearing on the ballot.
“Migoya was key in exposing judicial scandals, including the Mindy Masias case and other judicial misconduct issues,” Maes shared.
In November of 2022, Maes submitted a complaint regarding Chief Justice Brian Boatright’s handling of the Mindy Masias contract, an act which demonstrates the importance of Amendment H and the need for reform in judicial oversight.
When a judge is accused of misconduct in Colorado, the responsibility for determining whether disciplinary action is needed often rests with other judges. This process raises concerns about conflicts of interest and transparency, especially as those accused are part of the system meant to uphold justice.
Amendment H seeks to address these concerns by creating an independent body to oversee judicial discipline — removing this power solely from the hands of the Colorado judiciary.
The System as It Stands
When judges are responsible for disciplining their peers the potential for bias looms large. Maes illustrates this with his own experience. He filed a Request for Evaluation in which he accused Chief Justice Boatright of making public statements about the Masias case before a full investigation was conducted, potentially influencing the outcome of any future proceedings. “The foundation of our government was built on a deep and abiding respect for the Rule of Law and the belief that no person or entity is above the law,” Maes wrote in his complaint.
In the Masias scandal, former judicial employee Mindy Masias was allegedly paid to stay silent about misconduct within the judicial department. Chief Justice Boatright publicly denied these allegations early in the judicial process, stating that “court resources were never used to silence a blackmailer.” Maes argued that these statements violated ethical rules, as they appeared to be prejudging the outcome of an investigation that hadn’t even begun.
The Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline ultimately dismissed most of the allegations in Maes’ complaint. While they acknowledged concern over Boatright’s public comments, they took no significant disciplinary action, instead issuing a letter that effectively closed the case.
For many Coloradans, the idea that judges can police themselves raises fundamental questions about fairness and accountability. As Maes noted, “Confidence in the system is severely undermined if the public believes an outcome has been determined prior to the commencement of an action.”
Equal application of law includes judges
Like small businesses and non-profit organizations that are required to file paperwork concerning their financial activities, state judges are required to file financial disclosures. A judicial commission is tasked with overseeing compliance.
Investigative reporting on this issue has revealed a culture of systemic non-compliance. Yet the problem persists.
Maes argues this culture of non-compliance is due to members of the judicial commission, those charged with the responsibility of requiring judges to comply with financial disclosure requirements, don’t abide by the regulations themselves. “Several judges had failed to file required financial disclosures — information that should be made public. Yet, there’s been no consequences. The judges who are responsible for addressing this non-compliant behavior also fail to comply,” asserts Maes.
Without outside oversight, it’s too easy to sweep such lapses under the rug.
What Amendment H proposes
Amendment H aims to change this. It would shift oversight of judicial discipline from the Colorado Supreme Court to an independent group. “If we hold judges to the same legal standard as everyone else, our judicial system will work as intended,” Maes contends.
Maes believes Amendment H will restore trust in the judiciary and provide a pathway to needed judicial reform. “If we fail to bring these concerns about how the current system fails, these problems will continue,” he explained. An external disciplinary commission would create a more transparent and fair process. Those tasked with upholding the law would face greater accountability.
The Masias scandal: A case study in the need for reform
The Masias scandal offers a clear example of why Amendment H is so critical. “Chief Justice Boatright’s public comments on the case violated judicial ethics,” says Maes. “This showed a bias towards a conclusion before an investigation of the case facts. This preemptive defense can erode the public’s trust in the courts. It is a canon violation, and that’s why I submitted a formal complaint.”
Yet, the Commission’s response was minimal. They dismissed the allegations. They noted “an expression of concern” over inappropriate public comments but took no formal action.
“This is a system where judges get a pass from their peers,” Maes said, reflecting on the Commission’s decision. “There’s a lack of transparency, and that’s exactly what we need to change.”
Public trust and the rule of law
Amendment H is about restoring trust in the judiciary. When the public sees judges appearing to protect their colleagues, it undermines the rule of law. Dismissing non-compliance and serious complaints without action adds to this damage. Judges, like all officials, should face external checks on the use of their power. This will ensure they are impartial and fair.
“Supporting Amendment H is about demanding transparency from a system entrusted to act with accountability. It will compel a systemic overhaul and put a halt to the secretive cover the judiciary has practiced in our state’s highest courts,” Maes said.
Growing support for Amendment H
Support for Amendment H is gaining momentum, with outlets like the Colorado Springs Gazette recently endorsing the measure. As more voters learn about the importance of judicial reform, there is hope that Colorado will take the first step toward a more open and accountable system.