Three Arizona judges are on track to lose their seats after voters narrowly rejected them in judicial retention elections, according to unofficial Maricopa County results released on Monday, November 9 and reported in full on Tuesday, November 10. Superior Court Judges Julie Mata and Michael Rassas and Court of Appeals Judge Anni Hill Foster each finished below the majority they needed to stay on the bench — a rare outcome in a system where judges almost always survive.
Source: The Phoenix Focal
The county figures behind those percentages come from Maricopa County's official results file, as published in The Surprise Standard's county-wide tally: Mata at 48.6% Yes to 51.4% No, Rassas at 49.4% Yes to 50.6% No, and Hill Foster at 49.8% Yes to 50.2% No. Electoral Meridian's statewide results page, built from official results posted on November 9 at 9:05 p.m., independently lists Hill Foster at the same 49.8% Retain to 50.2% Remove, with 94% counted at that stage.
Source: The Surprise Standard, from Maricopa County's official results file
How retention works in Arizona
Arizona does not hold competitive elections for most judges in its larger counties. Under the merit-selection system, judges are appointed by the governor and then face voters in a yes-or-no retention question; a judge who fails to win a majority of Yes votes leaves the bench. Before this election, the Arizona Commission on Judicial Performance Review announced on September 2, 2026 that every merit-selected judge on the ballot met its performance standards, after surveys of jurors, witnesses, litigants, attorneys and court staff — all 82 judges reviewed this year met the standard, Electoral Meridian notes, so the fight over these three was never about the official review.
Source: Electoral Meridian, Arizona 2026 results
Judge Anni Hill Foster — the closest margin
Foster sits on the Arizona Court of Appeals. She was appointed by former Republican Gov. Doug Ducey and previously served as his top lawyer, The Phoenix Focal reported. The state review panel found she meets performance standards, but she drew opposition from groups across the political spectrum: the progressive group Civic Engagement Beyond Voting urged a No vote, arguing she could not be trusted to be impartial because of her work for Ducey, including a U.S. Supreme Court brief that sought to overturn Roe v. Wade, while Republicans in Legislative District 4 also called for her removal over a ruling she joined that allowed the county to keep secret its electronic records of how individual ballots were marked.
Source: The Phoenix Focal
Judge Julie Mata — family court, a DEI ruling and a dismissed complaint
Mata is a Maricopa County Superior Court family-court judge who handles divorces and custody disputes. Civic Engagement Beyond Voting criticised her for a July ruling that allowed a Republican-backed measure limiting diversity, equity and inclusion programs to appear on the ballot. Her most prominent critic has been Phoenix attorney David Gingras, who represented Laura Owens in a paternity case against former 'The Bachelor' star Clayton Echard; after Mata ruled against Owens, Gingras urged litigants to seek a different judge and filed a misconduct complaint, which the state Commission on Judicial Conduct dismissed, finding no clear and convincing evidence of ethical misconduct. A 2026 state review found Mata meets judicial standards, but about four in ten people who appeared in her courtroom and returned surveys rated her poorly or very poorly on impartiality, The Phoenix Focal reported.
Source: The Phoenix Focal
Judge Michael Rassas — juvenile court and parental rights
Rassas is a juvenile-court judge who was targeted mainly by Republican groups. Legislative District 4 Republicans pointed to his rulings in parental-rights cases, including one that an appeals court overturned because it relied on a father's past housing problems, according to The Phoenix Focal. His 50.6% No vote was the middle margin of the three — wider than Foster's, narrower than Mata's.
Source: The Phoenix Focal
Stephen Richer, a Republican and former Maricopa County recorder, defended all three judges. 'All three are conservatives. And, far more importantly and meaningfully, they were all thoughtful, ethical and respectful in their judicial conduct. They applied the law,' Richer wrote on social media. 'Judges are supposed to just follow the law and facts and then rule accordingly. They're not supposed to rule for their team.'
What happens next
The results are unofficial and will not be certified until the county canvass is complete. Under the Arizona timetable listed by Electoral Meridian, counties face a November 19 deadline to canvass the results, and the Secretary of State holds the official statewide canvass on November 23. Foster's margin — 50.2% to 49.8%, a gap of 0.4 percentage points — may be small enough to trigger an automatic recount under state law, The Phoenix Focal reported; Arizona's recount threshold cited by Electoral Meridian is a margin of 0.5% or less.
Source: Electoral Meridian, Arizona 2026 results
If the results stand, Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs will appoint replacements for all three judges, giving her an opportunity to reshape the courts at both the trial and appellate levels. The outcome would mark one of the few times in recent Arizona history that voters have removed multiple judges in a single election, and it underscores how retention races — normally the quietest line on the ballot — have become a proxy battlefield for broader political fights over reproductive rights, parental authority and election transparency, The Phoenix Focal reported. For litigants in Maricopa County family and juvenile courts, and for appellate cases across the state, the practical effect is three benches changing hands through a process that begins with the canvass later this month.