The legal fallout from an Arapahoe County judge’s public censure and resignation has begun, as the state office that represents indigent parents is now asking individuals to speak up if they believed racial bias affected the handling of their cases.

The Office of Respondent Parents’ Counsel has invited parents of color to report through its online complaint form any concerns of discrimination in their appearances before District Court Judge Natalie T. Chase. On April 16, the Colorado Supreme Court censured Chase and accepted her resignation after she admitted to using the N-word in front of Black court employees and opining on the Black Lives Matter movement from the bench. Chase, who is white, denied her conduct was rooted in racism.

“The public censure of Judge Chase brings to light what can happen behind closed courthouse doors,” wrote ORPC in a forthcoming statement shared with Colorado Politics. “Indeed, in Judge Chase’s case, it was only the brave voices of a few who brought her conduct to light. For them and the lawyers and investigators at the Commission on Judicial Discipline who listened, we are grateful. But what happens now? How does the system reassure families that a biased Judge did not make a biased decision?”

The General Assembly established ORPC in 2014 to provide attorneys for parents unable to afford one in dependency and neglect cases. Chase, who handled criminal matters before moving to a family court caseload, had the authority to assign custody or even terminate parental rights if a child were found to be abused or neglected and the parents did not abide by a corrective plan.

“The best we can do is to make sure that families are heard in whatever capacity that might be available,” said Melissa Michaelis Thompson, executive director of ORPC. She said that it is difficult under normal circumstances for a parent to complain about a judge, but the office will help share their story.

“More concretely, we will evaluate the wishes of the parent who calls, evaluate whether we can appoint a lawyer and if there is any appellate or other remedy, refer to the child protection ombudsman for investigation, and evaluate whether legislation or a chief justice directive can assist in in ensuring that racial bias did not impact a decision,” Thompson added.

In Colorado, dependency and neglect cases hinge on the best interest of the child. The Supreme Court reaffirmed that standard earlier this year, briefly acknowledging the concern that judges’ biases influence decision-making. Calling the best-interest standard an “impossible barrier,” Thompson said that realistically, a parent’s chances of altering the outcome in their case are low, and may be lower still if a child has already been adopted and the case closed for many years.

“I also think that some parents will not choose this route even if they were impacted by a biased judge because many parents will decide that the answer is not to reopen the trauma their family experienced,” she added.

On the other hand, criminal defense attorney LaQunya L. Baker said that Black criminal defendants whose cases Chase presided over should have some form of relief. Typically, it is difficult to prove bias, she explained.

But after Chase’s public admission, “the defendants who have appeared in front of Judge Chase have something concrete to rely on if they are making these claims against her prior rulings or sentences. This could lead to clients filing post-conviction motions for reconsiderations on sentences, attempting to withdraw pleas, or even requesting new trials,” Baker said.

Although the circumstances involving Chase appear to be novel, complaints about bias in child welfare proceedings are not. The American Bar Association notes that judges are powerful figures in such cases, and appellate courts may review for bias or prejudice.

In 1982, when the U.S. Supreme Court decided on the level of evidence needed to support terminating parental rights, Justice Harry A. Blackmun observed that dependency and neglect cases leave decisions “unusually open to the subjective values of the judge.”

He added: “Because parents subject to termination proceedings are often poor, uneducated, or members of minority groups, such proceedings are often vulnerable to judgments based on cultural or class bias.”

According to ORPC, Black children in Colorado are 4% of the child population, but 9% of the population in foster care. Hispanic children, at 31% of the child population, also represent 37% of those in foster care.

Other than affecting the outcome of cases, Thompson worried that the totality of the allegations against Chase, not simply the ones suggesting a racial bias, could have affected the “dignity of families” appearing in court, and implied that the judge was not completely focused on the best interests of the children.

“What we do know for sure is that we have struggled to retain attorneys in Arapahoe County more than any other place in the state,” Thompson said. “We hope that this is an opportunity to truly change the culture in Arapahoe for the better.”