The Arizona Commission on Judicial Performance Review announced on Apr. 24 that all justices and judges eligible for retention in the upcoming November 2026 general election have met judicial performance standards.
This decision is important because it provides voters with information about the qualifications and conduct of judges who will appear on the ballot, helping to ensure accountability and maintain public trust in the judicial system.
At its recent meeting, the Commission evaluated more than 10,000 surveys, reviewed written comments, and considered remarks from a public hearing before voting on whether each of the 84 judges statewide—and one Arizona Supreme Court justice—met performance standards. The results showed that every judge under review was found to meet these standards. A report detailing each judge’s performance will be published in the Secretary of State’s voter pamphlet and posted online at azjudges.info in September ahead of the Nov. 3 general election.
The JPR Commission was established by a constitutional amendment passed by voters in 1992 to conduct reviews and determine if judges should be retained based on their adherence to professional expectations. The merit selection system began earlier, in 1974, as part of efforts to strengthen impartiality within Arizona’s courts.
According to the official website, the Arizona Supreme Court operates from Phoenix as the top court overseeing state courts across Arizona. It ensures fair administration of justice statewide, supervises attorney regulations, includes seven justices serving staggered terms, and automatically reviews death penalty cases. The chief justice leads for a five-year term after being selected by fellow justices. The court also collaborates with bodies such as the Commission on Judicial Conduct to uphold high judicial standards—a responsibility reinforced since reforms like the Modern Courts Amendment of 1960 expanded its administrative authority.
Looking ahead, voters can use findings from both printed pamphlets and online resources when deciding whether or not to retain individual judges during November’s election.
