Two liberal activist judges: Donahoe & Daughton

Judge Gary Donahoe

Judge Gary Donahoe

AZ Judges Review has done a nice job exposing Presiding Judge Barbara Mundell’s handpicking of retired judges to handle key political cases, in order to ensure a liberal outcome. Most recently, she chose retired Democrat judge Donald Daughton, who has contributed to Obama and Harry Mitchell, to handle the lawsuit filed by Planned Parenthood demanding a temporary restraining order against Arizona’s newly passed abortion legislation. Of course Daughton granted it, stopping the laws from going into effect and thwarting the will of the people.

Another activist liberal judge whose high-profile biased court decisions keep popping up is Gary Donahoe. This time he has held the Sheriff’s Office in contempt for not being able to transport inmates to Court hearings on time. Problem is, it’s not their fault. The Board of Supervisors cut the Sheriff’s budget by 15%, in order to pay for the brand-new state of the art $340 million court tower which contains penthouse quarters for the judges.

In his order, Presiding Criminal Judge Gary Donahoe wrote that the sheriff’s court-security division is “chronically understaffed,” which he characterized as a consistent and conscious decision on the part of the Sheriff’s Office.

Well yes, we’ve heard that the Sheriff’s Office has been losing around 10 employees a month for the past year due to attrition, and it has not been able to replace them due to the severe budget cuts by the Supervisors. Guess Judge Donahoe forgot to put that in his memo.

Donahoe ordered the Sheriff’s Security Chief Deputy to pay $10,575 to the court, prosecutors, defendants, their attorneys, and jurors for their loss of time.  Utterly amazing. Why not just turn that money directly over to the Board of Supervisors and their Taj Mundell court tower?

This isn’t the first outrageous decision by this judge. Judge Mundell handpicked him to handle the lawsuit against the Supervisors over the court tower. Donahoe ordered the County Attorney off the case, saying there was a conflict (we’re not sure what – he never provided any reasons, even though the County Attorney had provided sworn affidavits from three ethics experts saying there were no conflicts). He ignored the obvious conflict – the Supervisors’ attorney, Tom Irvine (former attorney for the Democrat Party), was also the attorney for the Court. Donahoe’s ruling was especially offensive because it said the County Attorney had a conflict of interest in the investigation, but Donahoe didn’t even though he would have spacious new quarters in the courthouse being investigated.

This kind of judicial activism must be exposed and stopped.


Comments

  1. Do you know how many conservative business people support politicians on both sides of the aisle in the same election cycle? It’s called ‘covering your bases.’ You need to check out your favorite conservative business people and look at their giving records. The records are available on line. Don’t be surprised if the giving to D’s from conservative business people goes up in the next 18 months. If you have an issue covered by ‘x’ committee now chaired by a ‘D’, you will cover your base with a small donation. It is called getting ‘face time’ when the time is needed.

  2. Ron– are you saying you support pay-to-play politics?

  3. Didn’t one of these judges sign the subpoena allowig Sheriff Joe to raid Mesa City Hall?
    Oops, as usual holes start to form in a Chewie Shofir article.

  4. Question: Are retired judges subject to retention votes? If not, how can we the people hold them accountable? Perhaps via voting B. Mundell out? I would appreciate any info on this. Thanks.

  5. T$ –

    I don’t support ‘pay to play politics’ – I am only describing human behavior –

    there is a reason they call it ‘the best Congress money can buy’ 🙂

Leave a Reply