A much-needed overhaul of the procedures for investigating and disciplining Colorado’s judges is underway at the State Capitol. Thanks in part to extensive Gazette coverage exposing the system’s failings, the Legislature advanced key reforms last week enhancing accountability for a judiciary that has lacked adequate oversight.

A Senate committee approved three bills revising various aspects of the judicial discipline process – one of which would require statewide voter approval. All of the proposals follow allegations about judicial misconduct that went unpunished or were handled too leniently. Those allegations surfaced in 2021 in news accounts and prompted hearings by a special legislative committee.

The alleged incidents of judicial misconduct were at the core of threats by a former high-ranking Judicial Department official who had faced firing over financial irregularities. She threatened to make the allegations public in a sex-discrimination lawsuit – and allegedly received a multimillion-dollar consulting contract that later was canceled after it went public.

Stay up to speed: Sign-up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday

Although two investigations launched by the state Judicial Department weren’t able to prove the contract was the result of a quid pro quo, the probes revealed a number of shortcomings that included concerns with the process for filing misconduct complaints against judges and the overall experience by the victims who filed.

The reforms embodied in the package of pending legislation have the potential to make some meaningful improvements.

House Bill 23-1205 would create an independent ombudsman’s office for judicial discipline. The office’s duties would include creating and maintaining an anonymous reporting system for Judicial Department personnel to submit complaints as well as investigating and reporting on instances of misconduct the office receives.

House Bill 23-1019 would, among various provisions, require the state’s Commission on Judicial Discipline to disclose publicly more information about the allegations, investigations, and complaints it receives and the type of discipline it imposes. Importantly, the bill would repeal the requirement that records on a judicial investigation remain confidential when the the commission doesn’t seek the disciplined judge’s removal or retirement.

House Concurrent Resolution 1001 would create the Independent Judicial Discipline Adjudicative Board. It would conduct disciplinary hearings and hear appeals of informal orders from the Commission on Judicial Discipline – effectively serving as a check and balance on the Judicial Discipline Commission. Whenever the commission orders a formal hearing to discipline a judge or a state Supreme Court justice, or when a judge or justice wants to appeal an order for informal remedial action from the commission, a panel of the new board would run the hearing.

Taken all together, the reforms stand to pry open the closed doors behind which the state’s judiciary long was able to conceal its improprieties from the public. That’s a worthy end in itself, of course, because the public – which votes on the retention of judges and Supreme Court justices – at last will have more to go on in determining which incumbents no longer are worthy of serving on the bench.

Just as important is the public’s overall trust in the judiciary in general. Colorado’s justice system cannot afford a further erosion of confidence. Even after going through the legislative meat grinder – the current legislation already has been extensively amended – this endeavor only can shore up public confidence. It’s a welcome development.

Denver Gazette Editorial Board