In the ongoing saga of stupid surrounding Tina Peters, the latest chapter involves an attack on the judiciary. Specifically, a Texas woman submitted a complaint against Judge Matthew Barrett — who oversaw Peters’ case — with the Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline.
I read the complaint, and I am dumber for doing so.
While this particular complainant seems less coherent and more rambling than most Texans, Lori Gallagher’s primary bent centers on a ridiculous conspiracy theory that Barrett failed to disclose a conflict of interest and a personal stake in the voting system. It sounds like the kind of salacious details that hooks so many far-right keyboard cowgirls. A “gotcha” moment that blows the whole case open.
The alleged offense? Barrett won a judicial retention vote in 2022 in an election that used the Dominion Voting software Peters complained about.
Dun dun duuun!!!
Or more appropriately: dumb, dumb, duuumb!
It is true that Barrett did appear on the ballot for retention in 2022. Just like every other judge up for retention across the state, he had to face voters (unlike other elected officials, judges are barred from fundraising or even campaigning). It is difficult to determine what judge, if any, would not be conflicted using Gallagher’s argument.
In an absolute nailbiter, 40,381 residents in the 21st Judicial District (Mesa County) voted “Yes” to retain Barrett while 19,077 said “No.” If your math skills are as abysmal as Gallagher’s appear to be, that is more than 2-to-1 in favor. Or about 67.9%.
Of course, Peters herself benefited from the same system in 2018 when she won the race for Mesa County Clerk and Recorder. After withdrawing from her re-election bid to run for Colorado Secretary of State, she garnered only 11,589 votes from Mesa County in the primary, losing her home county to Pam Anderson, and staving off a last-place finish by only about a thousand votes. Peters subsequently alleged election fraud and shelled out more than $256,000 for a recount that netted her zero votes, after Anderson won statewide by nearly 100,00 votes.
Had Peters won by a single vote, I am sure she would have claimed the system worked perfectly.
Mesa County has been using Dominion Voting Systems equipment since 2016. In that time, the only significant, provable counting error came when Peters’ office forgot — for months — to collect 500 ballots from the drop box outside her office in 2019. The only reason the Mesa County Board of Commissioners had to sign a new contract with Dominion in 2021 was to obtain new equipment due to the damage caused by Peters that eventually landed her in Barrett’s courtroom.
The wild assumptions made in the complaint necessarily must ignore all other, more logical explanations for Barrett’s retention. That does not mean any of us should.
Colorado has excellent nomination and evaluation systems for judges. Each judicial district has a bipartisan commission composed of community leaders appointed by elected officials. Those commissions spend hours poring over data and interviews from lawyers and non-lawyers appearing before each judge. Commission members frequently take up seats in the gallery to observe how judges handle their dockets.
The 21st Judicial District Commission did exactly that for Barrett before the 2022 election.
Their report found that Barrett met or exceeded performance standards set by the state, including integrity, legal knowledge, communication skills, judicial temperament, administrative performance and service to the legal profession and public. They identified strengths, but also areas where Barrett could stand to grow. They cited the raw data compiled and how he compared to other district judges across multiple categories.
Eight of the nine members determined “Judge Barrett to be a valuable member of the bench.”
That does not surprise me. I watched almost the entire Peters trial and felt Barrett handled a difficult case with aplomb. He gave all parties, including Peters and her attorneys, the opportunity to be heard, but did not let anyone run roughshod over his court. Barrett ensured decorum in his court, several times addressing audience members who did not treat the proceedings with the dignity he believed they were due. Barrett impressed me at least as much as he impressed his evaluators.
From 1990 to 2016, 99% of judges receiving a positive recommendation from their local evaluation commission have been retained by Colorado voters. In 2022, that meant 134 out of 135 on the ballot kept their job.
Barrett’s retention had nothing to do with the machines used to count the votes and everything to do with his excellence on the bench.
Of course, that does not seem to register with people like Gallagher. They have become so caught up attacking any judge who dares disagree with their preferred outcome, that the immediate response is to slur and slander. It is a pattern highlighted by former federal Judge Michael Luttig in my column from last week.
This complaint will be processed and summarily dismissed. That does not mean attacking judges like Barrett is any less dangerous. We need people like him donning black robes in Colorado.
Mario Nicolais is an attorney and columnist who writes on law enforcement, the legal system, health care and public policy. Follow him on BlueSky: @MarioNicolais.bsky.social.
The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.
Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.