Arizona Supreme Court justice targeted for removal over 1864 abortion ban blasts critics

Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick forcefully decries the effort urging voters to remove him and a colleague from the bench since upholding the state’s 1864 abortion law, arguing his critics are “hijacking the retention process.”

In a 1,500-word opinion piece in The Arizona Republic published Monday, Bolick insults his critics, defends the abortion ruling and the state’s judges, and warns against a politically driven retention system that would be “game-over for the rule of law.”

Those seeking to oust him and Justice Kathryn H. King have turned to the slogan “Vote Them Out!” which, he said, “packs with venom what it lacks in substance.”

The liberal activist group Progress Arizona is advocating their removal, saying that when the court puts “ideology over the people” it is a “civic duty” to change justices.

“The groups opposing us need a serious civics lesson about the role of the courts. Nowhere in their materials will you read about the importance of an independent judiciary in protecting our free society,” Bolick wrote.

In November, voters will weigh whether to retain Bolick and King on the state Supreme Court as part of periodic public input on the judiciary. Former Gov. Doug Ducey appointed both justices to the high court.

Voters have only removed six judges since the system was adopted in 1978, but three Maricopa County Superior Court judges lost their jobs that way in 2022. Bolick and King will face voters at a time of intense pushback against the rollback on abortion rights in Arizona and the U.S.

Bolick, who is formally an independent and previously worked with the libertarian-leaning Goldwater Institute, argued that “partisan special-interest” groups targeted two of the judges because they were “politically objectionable.”

In 1990, Bolick co-founded the Institute for Justice with funding from the billionaire industrialist Charles Koch. That organization has taken libertarian positions on matters ranging from eminent domain to school vouchers to civil forfeiture.

Bolick, 66, describes himself as an independent who has set Arizona’s record for judicial dissents. But he is also linked to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, the conservative justice who has become a symbol to many of the court’s rightward tilt and who has faced widespread complaints of violating the principles of judicial ethics. Thomas is godfather to one of Bolick’s children, according to the 2000 book "Gang of Five: Leaders at the Center of the Conservative Crusade" by Nina J. Easton.

Bolick's words: I don't need to be a Supreme Court justice. But Arizona needs the system that got me here

Bolick’s wife is Shawnna Bolick, who has been a member of the Arizona Legislature for much of the time since the 2018 elections. A week after the 2020 elections, and before the presidential results were certified, she was among the state lawmakers who received an email from Thomas’ wife Virginia Thomas, to “take action to ensure that a clean slate of (presidential) Electors is chosen.”

Shawnna Bolick responded in writing to Virginia Thomas at the time by noting their personal relationship with the Thomases and told her how to file a formal complaint.

Bolick worries that the recent 4-2 abortion ruling that would have reinstated a 19th century near-total ban on abortions is the spark that will unfairly place a target on him and King. Within weeks, Democrats and a few key Republicans passed a bill to repeal the ban.

Bolick said the April ruling that reignited the debate over abortion rights was “solidly grounded in law.”

He said the only real legal question before the state’s high court was whether the Arizona Legislature had restored the 1864 law when it enacted new abortion restrictions in 2022 ahead of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling erasing federal abortion rights.

“After careful analysis, we concluded it did,” Bolick wrote.

He alluded to the political fallout for his wife, who was one of two GOP lawmakers in the Senate to join with Democrats to repeal the 1864 law after the ruling was handed down.

“That caused no marital disharmony, because she is a policymaker, and I am not,” he wrote.

Bolick goes on to warn against state-level judicial systems found in Texas and Wisconsin. In Texas, electing judges has led to a system where political contributions are considered before legal hearings, he said. In Wisconsin, a recent state Supreme Court election there drew tens of millions in funding from out-of-state interests, Bolick wrote.

Now it is Arizona where judges are feeling political heat, he said.

“The system is not built to withstand political attacks, and judges seeking retention are at a massive disadvantage,” he wrote. “We cannot ask people for money — and funds raised on our behalf would (and should) be scrutinized. Our judicial ethics limit what we can talk about, and even prohibit us from endorsing each other. For those reasons, I will not have a campaign. By contrast, those trying to take us out have no financial limits and no ethics rules.”

Bolick said the civic stakes have led him to seek to remain on the bench.

“Until recently, I was undecided whether to seek retention. After all, mandatory retirement means I am eligible to serve only three more years,” he wrote. “But I cannot stand aside when our merit selection system is under attack. We cannot have judges looking over their shoulders to assess the political fallout of their decisions. If they do, it is game-over for the rule of law.”

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Clint Bolick: Arizona's courts face game-over with political removals