A pattern of misconduct: Maricopa County Judge Charlene Jackson fails to perform duties fairly and impartially

The Growing Concerns Over Judge Charlene Jackson's Conduct in Maricopa County

Escalating allegations against Judge Charlene Jackson of the Maricopa County Family Court are drawing attention to the Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct and Arizona leadership for their continued failure to remove Jackson from the bench. 

Dozens of troubling rulings highlight Judge Jackson’s habitual and troubling misuse of authority, raising serious questions about the integrity of the judicial process within her court. The actions taken by Judge Jackson have sparked fears that the principles of justice are being compromised, particularly in cases involving vulnerable children and victims of abuse.

Judge Jackson's Decision Endangers a Child's Safety and Well-Being

In a shocking ruling, Jackson mandated that a four-year-old girl be removed from her mother, who has been her primary caregiver since birth, and placed into the custody of her father, despite substantial evidence of his abusive behavior and his admissions that he has never cared for the child. The record reflects substantial evidence of child abuse and domestic violence perpetrated by the father against the Mother, which the child has witnessed. Despite this, Jackson's ruling appears to disregard the child's safety and well-being when she issued orders that directly contradicted the Arizona Rules of Family Law Procedures. 

The court's decision to restrict the child's contact with her mother, who has cared for her since birth, raises significant concerns about Judge Jackson’s Judicial fitness. By failing to acknowledge the trauma inflicted by her ruling, Judge Jackson has demonstrated a troubling disregard for the child's best interests. Her actions not only exacerbate the conflict between the parents but also subject an innocent child to unnecessary suffering, calling into question her commitment to uphold the law and protect those who are most vulnerable.

Examining Judge Jackson's Patterns: Is Parental Humiliation Taking Precedence Over Child Welfare?

Judge Jackson frequently issues rulings that seem driven by a desire to penalize one parent while favoring the other, often disregarding the best interests of the children involved. In family law, the primary focus should be on what benefits the child, and using parenting plans as a means of punishment is inappropriate. A thorough review of orders from Judge Jackson's division reveals a troubling pattern: her decisions often appear to be motivated by a punitive agenda, subjecting children to unnecessary distress and trauma in the process. Most of her rulings scarcely acknowledge the children involved, instead focusing on shaming or reprimanding one parent while siding with the other.

There is a concerning trend in Judge Jackson's approach, as she has been known to remove children from their primary caregivers without adequate justification, placing them instead with a parent who may have a history of abuse or minimal prior involvement in the child's life. This disregard for the emotional and psychological impact on the children is alarming, particularly when she severs ties between them and their primary caregivers—often the very individuals who have nurtured and cared for them since birth. The lasting consequences of such decisions can be devastating, leaving children to grapple with feelings of abandonment and confusion long-term.

Furthermore, Judge Jackson often imposes limited supervised visitation as a form of punishment for parents who have never posed a threat to their children. This practice not only constitutes a significant misuse of judicial authority but also inflicts emotional harm on the children involved. Additionally, her failure to consider the financial implications of these visitation orders raises serious questions about her motivations, especially when the costs associated with supervised visitation can be exorbitant. This pattern of behavior suggests a troubling abuse of power and potential financial gain, further complicating the already fraught dynamics of custody disputes.

Jackson's Divorce Records Expose Potential Motive for Bias in Her Rulings on Domestic Violence Cases

A review of Jackson's personal divorce records suggests that she may be emotionally affected by cases involving domestic violence, yet she does not recuse herself from such matters. Her ruling, which limits the child's contact with her mother to only supervised visits, fails to consider the emotional trauma inflicted on the child and reflects a troubling bias. This decision not only undermines the child's best interests but also raises concerns about the fairness of the judicial proceedings under her oversight.

Judge Charlene Jackson does not fulfill her responsibilities as a judge in a fair and impartial manner when she consistently sides with abusers rather than supporting victims of domestic violence, child abuse, or prioritizing the best interests of the child - as she is required to do under Arizona Law. 

Judicial canons mandate that judges uphold civility and decorum, qualities that Jackson appears unable to demonstrate.

Learn more about Judge Charlene Jackson's misconduct here

Please consider supporting us by signing our Change.org Petition to Remove Judge Charlene Jackson from the Maricopa County Superior Court.