How to Research Judges on Your Ballot: SF Metro Area Judicial Retention Scorecard 2026

Researched and drafted with AI assistance. AI can make mistakes, so nothing here is 100% guaranteed. See the full disclaimer at the end.

All 13 justices have clean public discipline records, so the fitness standard clears every one of them. Your yes/no really turns on the philosophy standard.

How to use this

Fitness standard. Vote no only for misconduct, incompetence, or ethics problems. Under this lens, check the discipline record and the State Bar rating. None of the 13 appears in the Commission on Judicial Performance public discipline database.

Philosophy standard. Vote on how they rule. Under this lens, look at notable rulings and dissents in each scorecard. Each scorecard names who would read a ruling as a plus and who would read it as a minus.

Context. No California appellate justice has lost a retention vote since the system began in the 1930s. Voters have removed Supreme Court justices only once, in 1986. In the 2022 cycle, First District justices on this list drew about 78–79% yes district-wide.

At a glance

Justice	Court	Years on this court	Fitness signal	Philosophy lane	First retention?
Joshua P. Groban	Supreme Court	~8	Top State Bar rating; clean	Court's center; votes with majority	No
Kelli M. Evans	Supreme Court	~4	Second-tier rating; clean	Liberal wing; frequent criminal-case dissents	Yes
Mark B. Simons	1st Dist., Div. 5	~25	Clean; longest-serving	Textualist; defers to Legislature	No
Kathleen M. Banke	1st Dist., Div. 1	~17	Clean; appellate specialist	Statute-focused; struck SF vacancy tax	No
Therese M. Stewart	1st Dist., Div. 2 (PJ)	~12	Clean	Consensus-builder; civil-rights litigator	No
Ioana Petrou	1st Dist., Div. 3	~8	Clean	Ex-prosecutor; sided with PG&E on defamation	No
Tracie L. Brown	1st Dist., Div. 4 (PJ)	~8	Clean	Ex-prosecutor; upheld most of Prop 22	No
Gordon B. Burns	1st Dist., Div. 5	~8	Clean	Government and environmental lawyer	No
Victor A. Rodríguez	1st Dist., Div. 3	~5	Clean	Mixed outcomes; public-service career	No
Danny Y. Chou	1st Dist., Div. 5	~3	Clean	Scrutinizes government power over individuals	Yes
Monique Langhorne Wilson	1st Dist., Div. 1	~3	Clean	Trial-judge practicality; resentencing work	Yes
Tara M. Desautels	1st Dist., Div. 2	~2.5	Clean	Ex-prosecutor; defers to trial courts	Yes
Charles A. Smiley	1st Dist., Div. 1	~1.7	Top State Bar rating; clean	Ex-public defender; thin appellate record	Yes

“Years on this court” counts from appointment to Nov 2026. Prior trial-court years are in each scorecard.

Supreme Court: Joshua P. Groban

Clean record, top peer rating, and a centrist-consensus voting pattern. Retained in Contra Costa in 2022 with 74.6% yes.

Item	Detail
Seat	Associate Justice, California Supreme Court
Appointed by	Gov. Jerry Brown; sworn in Jan 3, 2019
Time on bench	~7 years 10 months (no prior judicial experience)
Bar admission	December 1998 (~28 years)
Education	Harvard Law, J.D. cum laude, 1998; Stanford, A.B. with honors, 1995
Career before bench	Federal law clerk (S.D.N.Y.); Paul, Weiss (1999–2005); Munger, Tolles & Olson (2005–2010); Senior Advisor to Gov. Brown (2011–2018), vetting 600+ judicial appointments; UCLA Law lecturer
State Bar (JNE) rating	Exceptionally Well Qualified (top tier)
Public discipline	None found
Last retention, Contra Costa	2022: 74.6% yes

Case work. The Supreme Court hears discretionary appeals, all death-penalty appeals, and big unsettled legal questions. The court issued 75 majority opinions in the 2018–19 court year, and most were unanimous. Groban writes his share as assigned.

Notable rulings and votes

• Jan 2026: wrote separately urging the Legislature to clarify the Brown Act (open-meetings law) after the court declined to depublish a case.
• Feb 2024: dissented from the court’s denial of a habeas corpus petition.
• Joined Justice Evans in voting to review In re S.M., a juvenile case removing a baby from parents’ custody.
• 2023: joined the majority in People v. Braden (affirmed), where Evans dissented.

Fitness standard: Strong yes signal. Top JNE rating, clean discipline record, no controversy.

Philosophy standard: Sits near the court’s center. Votes with the majority far more than he dissents. Occasional dissents lean toward process and fairness rather than a clear ideological lane. Critics’ main knock at appointment was zero bench experience and a political-staff background.

Sources: CA Voter Guide statement · JNE rating · Brown Act statement · People v. Braden minutes · 2022 Contra Costa result

Supreme Court: Kelli M. Evans

Clean record and a deep public-service resume. She is one of the court’s two most frequent dissenters, mostly on criminal cases.

Item	Detail
Seat	Associate Justice, California Supreme Court
Appointed by	Gov. Gavin Newsom; sworn in Jan 2, 2023
Time on bench	~5.5 years total: Alameda County Superior Court (2021–2022), Supreme Court since 2023 (~3 years 10 months)
Bar admission	1994 (~32 years)
Education	UC Davis Law, J.D., 1994 (MLK Jr. Award for Public Service); Stanford, B.A., 1991
Career before bench	Assistant Public Defender, Sacramento; ACLU of Northern California; U.S. DOJ Civil Rights Division trial attorney; federal court monitor; State Bar Senior Director; Special Assistant AG; Chief Deputy Legal Affairs Secretary to Gov. Newsom
State Bar (JNE) rating	Well Qualified (second tier of four)
Public discipline	None found
First voter test	This is her first retention election

Case work. As a trial judge she presided over both criminal and civil matters. On the Supreme Court she hears the same docket as Groban.

Notable rulings and votes

• 2023: wrote the unanimous opinion in California Medical Association v. Aetna, her first for the court.
• 2023: wrote the dissent in People v. Braden (joined by Justice Liu); the majority affirmed.
• 2024–25 term: she and Justice Liu each dissented more than 60 times from denials of review, mostly criminal cases.
• Recorded dissenting votes on several Racial Justice Act petitions and in People v. Letner (2025).

Fitness standard: Yes signal. Clean record, unanimous confirmation, “Well Qualified” rating. The rating is one notch below the top. Evaluators still predicted she’d be an outstanding justice.

Philosophy standard: Clearest lane of the 13. She sits with Liu in the court’s liberal wing, pushing for more review of criminal convictions and sentencing. A Daily Journal analysis noted they dissent often but rarely persuade the majority. Voters who favor stronger defendant protections will read that as a plus. Voters who favor finality in criminal cases will read it as a minus.

Sources: CA Voter Guide statement · Court bio · JNE rating · First opinion · Dissent trend (Daily Journal) · Letner vote

First District Court of Appeal: 11 justices

All 11 have clean discipline records. Every confirmation vote on record was unanimous. The real differences are tenure, prior career, and the kinds of rulings they write.

Appellate justices sit in three-judge panels and review trial-court decisions. They don’t hold trials. Most First District rulings are unanimous. Bar admission dates are not published in the state voter materials for appellate justices, so the J.D. year is shown instead. Bar admission typically follows within months.

Justice	Division	Appointed by	On this court since	Prior bench	J.D.
Mark B. Simons	5	Gov. Gray Davis	2001 (~25 yrs)	Contra Costa courts, 1980–2000	U. Chicago, 1970
Kathleen M. Banke	1	Gov. Schwarzenegger	2009 (~17 yrs)	Alameda Superior, 2006–09	U. Colorado, 1979
Therese M. Stewart (Presiding)	2	Gov. J. Brown; PJ by Newsom 2022	2014 (~12 yrs)	None	UC Berkeley, 1981
Ioana Petrou	3	Gov. J. Brown	2018 (~8 yrs)	Alameda Superior, 2010–18	UC Berkeley, 1993
Tracie L. Brown (Presiding)	4	Gov. J. Brown; PJ by Newsom 2023	2018 (~8 yrs)	SF Superior, 2013–18	UC Berkeley, 1996
Gordon B. Burns	5	Gov. J. Brown	2018 (~8 yrs)	None	UC Law SF (Hastings)
Victor A. Rodríguez	3	Gov. Newsom	2021 (~5 yrs)	Alameda Superior, 2018–21	UC Berkeley
Danny Y. Chou	5	Gov. Newsom	2023 (~3 yrs)	San Mateo Superior, 2018–23	Harvard, cum laude
Monique Langhorne Wilson	1	Gov. Newsom	2024 (~3 yrs)	Napa, 2006–23	UC Berkeley, 1999
Tara M. Desautels	2	Gov. Newsom	2024 (~2.5 yrs)	Alameda Superior, 2010–24	UC Hastings, 1997
Charles A. Smiley	1	Gov. Newsom	2025 (~1.7 yrs)	Alameda, 2007–25	UC Law SF

Division One

Kathleen M. Banke. Career appellate lawyer for 20+ years at Crosby, Heafey and Reed Smith, with 200+ appeals and writs. Certified appellate specialist. Writes the standard practice treatise on civil writs.

• Sept 2026: wrote the unanimous opinion striking down San Francisco’s voter-approved vacancy tax (Prop M) as conflicting with the state Ellis Act.
• Daily Journal describes her rulings as focused on substance over labels.
• Fitness: Strong. 17 years on this court, clean record, deep appellate expertise.
• Philosophy: Statute-focused and pragmatic. The Prop M ruling favored property-owner rights over a local tax voters approved. Housing advocates may see it as a minus. Property-rights voters may see it as a plus.

Monique Langhorne Wilson. First African American commissioner and judge on the Napa bench. Former Napa deputy DA. Won a contested Napa election in 2020 with over 80%. Berkeley undergrad and law school.

• Has written opinions on murder resentencing, whistleblower retaliation, and alleged coaching abuse.
• As a pro tem justice in 2023, wrote a felony-murder resentencing opinion that drew wide praise.
• Fitness: Strong. 17 years as a trial-level judicial officer, clean record.
• Philosophy: Trial-judge practicality. Prosecutor background plus resentencing work gives a balanced profile. First retention vote.

Charles A. Smiley. 18 years on the Alameda bench, including presiding judge. Started as an Alameda County public defender. Rated Exceptionally Well Qualified by the State Bar evaluators.

• Wrote a flag-display ruling after a city asked the court whether it could comply; he held it could not.
• Criminal opinions cover jury instructions, sentencing, and probation conditions.
• Fitness: Strong. Top peer rating, long trial-court leadership record.
• Philosophy: Thin appellate record (under 2 years). Defense-side roots and collaborative-justice court work. He’s on the ballot only for the remaining 4 years of his predecessor’s term.

Division Two

Therese M. Stewart (Presiding Justice). 12 years as SF Chief Deputy City Attorney, managing ~200 lawyers. Argued San Francisco’s marriage-equality cases. First openly lesbian justice on the Court of Appeal. Cornell, then Berkeley Law (Order of the Coif).

• 2023, People v. Campbell: held gang-murder special-circumstance findings didn’t by themselves bar resentencing; ordered a hearing.
• Found a habeas petitioner adequately alleged prosecutors used misleading testimony and withheld a witness deal.
• Civil: held trial judges should test an expert’s methods, not whether the opinion is persuasive.
• Fitness: Strong. 12 years on the court, runs a division that rarely splits.
• Philosophy: Consensus-builder with a civil-rights litigation background. Her criminal rulings lean toward giving defendants a hearing on resentencing and misconduct claims. Voters who prioritize finality may read that as a minus.

Tara M. Desautels. 14 years on the Alameda bench, including presiding judge during COVID. Nearly 8 years as an Alameda deputy DA, including child sexual assault cases. Then Pillsbury Winthrop.

• Aug 2026, Schurman Family Co. v. Superior Court: extended the Privette doctrine to shield a landlord when its tenant hired the contractor whose worker was injured. The worker has asked the Supreme Court to review.
• 2024, Howell v. State Dept. of State Hospitals: deferred to the trial judge on attorney fees.
• Fitness: Strong. Long trial-court leadership, clean record.
• Philosophy: Deferential to trial courts. Emphasizes litigants owning their trial choices. Business and property defendants fared well in her Privette ruling. First retention vote.

Division Three

Ioana Petrou. Federal prosecutor in New York and San Francisco, where she ran the Major Crimes unit. Then Alameda Superior judge for 8 years. Named 2016 Alameda Trial Judge of the Year. Berkeley undergrad (highest distinction) and Berkeley Law.

• Hearn v. PG&E: her opinion wiped out a $2.16 million defamation verdict for a fired worker. The Supreme Court is now reviewing it.
• Jan 2026: authored a ruling in In re Fuel Industry Climate Cases.
• Retained in 2022 with 78.5% district-wide.
• Fitness: Strong. Clean record, top trial-judge honors.
• Philosophy: Former prosecutor with complex-civil depth. The PG&E ruling sided with the employer. Worker-rights voters may weigh that against her.

Victor A. Rodríguez. Son of courthouse custodians in Livermore. Spent 12 years as a California Supreme Court staff attorney, including for Justices Moreno, Liu, Corrigan, and Cuéllar. Ran Alameda’s dedicated domestic-violence restraining-order courtroom. Never worked at a law firm. USC, Cal State Long Beach (M.A.), Berkeley Law.

• Sept 2026: held UC Regents acted in a governmental capacity, so the UC Irvine hospital is exempt from local zoning rules.
• Upheld a 1996 regulation letting auto insurers use marital status as a rating factor.
• 2025, In re Riley: sided with a woman removed from a sheriff’s work-release program after morning sickness caused missed shifts.
• Retained in 2022 to finish his predecessor’s term.
• Fitness: Strong. Deep appellate staff experience, clean record.
• Philosophy: Hard to pigeonhole. Rulings favored the state university and insurers in some cases, and individual defendants in others. Public-service career only.

Division Four

Tracie L. Brown (Presiding Justice). Harvard (magna cum laude), Berkeley Law. Ninth Circuit clerk. Federal prosecutor who won a major online “pill mill” trial. SF Superior judge for 5 years, including domestic violence court.

• Wrote the opinion largely upholding Proposition 22, the voter-approved measure keeping app-based drivers as independent contractors.
• Retained in 2022 (79.4% in Sonoma County results).
• Fitness: Strong. Elevated to presiding justice in 2023 by unanimous confirmation.
• Philosophy: Prosecutor background. The Prop 22 ruling upheld most of a voter-approved measure against a constitutional challenge. App-based companies backed Prop 22. Labor groups led the challenge.

Division Five

Mark B. Simons. Longest-serving justice on the First District. Contra Costa roots: deputy public defender here until 1980, then Mt. Diablo Municipal Court, then Contra Costa Superior Court (presiding judge 1999–2000). Over 45 years as a judge. Michigan, then University of Chicago Law (1970). Former dean of the state’s judicial college.

• Let Sonoma County’s civilian sheriff watchdog subpoena deputies.
• Daily Journal notes his statutory-text focus cuts across parties and outcomes.
• Retained in 2014 (75.9% in Sonoma County results).
• Fitness: Strong. Decades of clean service. Known for heavy research and sharp oral-argument questioning.
• Philosophy: Textualist and deferential to the Legislature. Hardest to label by party. Tenure is the only debate point: he finished college in 1967, and a new 12-year term would run to 2039.

Gordon B. Burns. No trial-court experience. Career at the California Department of Justice, including the state’s first Deputy Solicitor General for Civil Law. Then CalEPA Undersecretary (2011–2018), overseeing water rights, drought, and cannabis regulation. UCLA, then UC Law SF.

• 2026: sat by assignment on the California Supreme Court for the Riverside County ballot-seizure cases.
• Retained in 2022 with 78.5% district-wide.
• Fitness: Solid. Clean record. Trusted enough to sit on the Supreme Court by assignment.
• Philosophy: Government-lawyer background in environmental and water law. His published rulings have drawn the least press coverage of the 11.

Danny Y. Chou. Harvard (magna cum laude) and Harvard Law (cum laude). Chief of Appellate Litigation at the SF City Attorney. Helped win marriage equality and a lead-paint judgment against manufacturers. 2014 Public Justice Trial Lawyer of the Year. San Mateo Superior judge for 5 years.

• Held that a Contra Costa man held 311 days under back-to-back temporary conservatorships, before any finding he was gravely disabled, was denied due process.
• Authored Wise v. Tesla Motors (arbitration) and Navellier v. Putnam (civil procedure).
• Fitness: Strong. Clean record, unanimous confirmation.
• Philosophy: Scrutinizes how government uses its power over individuals. Public-interest litigation roots. First retention vote.

Sources: SOS official judicial ballot list · First District justices and bios · Banke (Daily Journal) · Langhorne Wilson (DJ) · Smiley (DJ) · Smiley JNE rating · Stewart (DJ) · Desautels (DJ) · Petrou (DJ) · Rodríguez (DJ) · Brown (DJ) · Simons (DJ) · Burns pro tem · Chou (DJ) · Petrou 2022 result · Burns 2022 result

Key takeaways

• Fitness: All 13 are clean. No public discipline, unanimous confirmations wherever the vote is reported, and peer ratings from Well Qualified to Exceptionally Well Qualified where published.
• Philosophy: Evans has the clearest ideological lane. Banke, Petrou, Brown, and Desautels have recent rulings that favored property owners, employers, or businesses. Stewart, Chou, and Rodríguez each have rulings siding with individuals against government.
• Experience spread: Simons (25 years) and Banke (17) anchor the court. Smiley (under 2) and Desautels (2.5) have the thinnest appellate records.
• Contra Costa tie: Simons spent roughly 27 years in Contra Costa as a public defender and then a judge.

Core sources

• Secretary of State: official 2026 judicial ballot list
• Secretary of State: Supreme Court statements of qualifications
• First District Court of Appeal: justices and bios
• Commission on Judicial Performance: public discipline database
• CA Courts: appellate retention elections
• CalMatters: 2026 Supreme Court guide
• LAist: appellate retention history