Think the AZ judiciary is not political? Think again

Proving the judicial apple doesn’t falls far from the appointing tree, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Hannah Jr. — appointed to the bench by hard-left Gov. Janet Napolitano — has ordered the Arizona Republican Party to pay $18,237.59 in legal fees. The party’s wrongdoing? The AZ GOP had the temerity to challenge the veracity of Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs’ mandating voting centers instead of more convenient polling places in the November 2020 election.

This absurd ruling came in response to a request by Hobbs, also a democrat, which the judge found to be “reasonable and appropriate.” Hobbs, next in line of ascension to the governor’s office, alleged the Republican Party was purposely delaying certification of the results and “not the adjudication of good faith claims.”

Devious Hobbs, who has never concealed her radical bent, previously tweeted that supporters of President Donald Trump were “neo-nazis.”

In 2007, SRAZ titled a revealing post,Merit takes a back seat in judicial appointments,” exposing Janet Napolitano’s then-recent judicial appointees. When the judicial charade, which claims to be “non-partisan” replaced Superior and Appellate Courts judicial elections in 1974, what was dubbed “merit selection” was deceptively touted as removing politics from the process. The result? Judges are appointed by a partisan governor from a final list sent by a partisan commission with members who are gubernatorially appointed.

After their appointment, judges only appear on the ballot for “retention,” which is a guarantee of permanency on the bench, since only three have been removed in nearly fifty years. The final list from which the governor selects is also bound by politics, allowing for no more than two-thirds to be from the same political party and constitutionally mandated to represent ethnic and gender diversity. The system has incrementalism built in since it originally was only in effect in Maricopa and Pima Counties.  As other counties have reached the 250,000 population threshold, they are instantly swept into the mix.

No good ever comes from voters giving up their rights after being told others know more than they do.

6 Responses to Think the AZ judiciary is not political? Think again

  1. MAGA Hat Man says:

    Judge John Hannah doesn’t appear impartial to me. He’s a partisan appointee engaging in partisanship. The AZ GOP generates money to cover expenses through mostly small donations from Republican voters. $18,000+ doesn’t come easy.

  2. Villanova says:

    Merit selection also provided job insurance for judges, since they were no longer subject to the voter’s discretion, accountability and the annoyance of having to run to maintain their powerful posts. The so-called retention ballot is a deceptive mind game, allowing voters to think it matters.

  3. Trevor says:

    Not to mention Andrew Hurwitz and Scott Bales were appointed to the Arizona Supreme Court because they were both personal friends of the Governor. And never forget when McCain and RINOS were pushing for Hurwitz on the US District Court. Still amazes me that Janet got elected. Guess Betsy Bayless and Kathy Petsas love RINOS so much cause they are the same!

  4. Arizona Conservative Guy says:

    Those intent on altering the judicial election system obviously regarded voters as incompetent when selecting judges. It’s a wonder we’re able to select other office holders…even the governors who appoint the judges…and the state hasn’t cataclysmically taken a nose dive into the Grand Canyon. We’re smart and tough, even surviving Señor Juan McAmnesty and his wrenched leftist wife and daughter, carrying on his “legacy” and supporting Joe Biden.

  5. Realist says:

    Where does “merit” come into play when the entire process is deeply rooted in politics?

  6. Legal Eagle says:

    Merit selection is a ruse. It’s clearly a cleverly designed insider’s game and extremely political, but we the people have no say. “Retention” was obviously a con thrown in to give the illusion of our finger in the pie, when the politicos, lawyer members, and the presiding justice have both hands and feet immersed in it.