Judges in Idaho take an oath to uphold the law and to remain impartial, even in the face of public pressure. They do not run on political platforms. They do not author legislation. Their job is not to deliver the outcome any one group desires—it is to apply the law fairly. This structure exists to ensure that constitutional rights are protected regardless of political pressure or partisan trends.
That structure is now being deliberately challenged.
Recent developments point to a coordinated campaign by far-right actors to undermine the integrity of Idaho’s judicial branch. Through legislation, propaganda, and intimidation campaigns, these actors are working to erode judicial independence and compel judges to conform to a specific political ideology.
In a detailed 2023 article published in The Advocate, former Idaho Court of Appeals Judge and former Dean of the University of Idaho College of Law, Donald L. Burnett, Jr., issued a warning about these efforts. He traced the origin and importance of judicial independence back to the Constitution itself, noting that the framers specifically designed the judiciary to operate free from political control. Burnett cited Alexander Hamilton, who described the courts as “an excellent barrier to the encroachments and oppressions of the representative body.”
Burnett also detailed how Idaho’s judicial system was once considered a national model. A 1967 reform law replaced a fragmented system with an integrated statewide structure, supported by a nonpartisan merit-based appointment process. The Idaho Judicial Council was formed with a deliberate balance of power—no single branch or party had majority control over appointments. That structure has been weakened by recent legislation.
In 2023, the Idaho Legislature passed SB 1148, which allows the Governor to reject the initial list of judicial nominees and demand a new list. The bill also expanded the Judicial Council and shifted more appointment power to the Governor. Additionally, it removed incumbent labels from ballots when judges stand for election, making it harder for voters to recognize qualified sitting judges. Burnett and others argue these changes politicize the judicial process and incentivize judges to raise money and campaign—actions that threaten both actual impartiality and public trust in the courts.
This erosion of independence is not confined to legislative procedure. Coordinated efforts to pressure and intimidate judges are now sadly part of the far-right’s political playbook.
In 2022, the Idaho Capital Sun reported that extremists associated with Ammon Bundy and his People’s Rights Network began targeting judges and prosecutors with doxxing campaigns. Personal information was published online, and activists encouraged protests outside officials’ homes. These actions were designed to intimidate and coerce judges into caving to their demands. And when they rule against the far-right’s agenda, they are put on notice that they will become the target of deceptive propaganda campaigns designed to stir hate towards them.
The same network of far-right agitators is now focused on Regina McCrea, a well-respected attorney and recent appointee to Idaho’s First Judicial District. McCrea previously served on a library board and was publicly targeted by far-right actors for her support of professional library policies. During the campaign to remove books with even the slightest mention of LGBTQ+ content from public libraries, McCrea defended the role of libraries as public institutions accountable to the law, rather than to partisan moral judgments. She focused on the rule of law over the ideological zealotry of Christian Nationalists engaged in misinformation attacks on public institutions. To zealots like KCRCC and IFF chairman Brent Regan, looking for a narrative target, this was all they needed to brand her a heretic.
Now that Governor Little has appointed her to the bench, those same political actors are again using her name to stir outrage. The attacks on McCrea are not based on legal work or misconduct. They are rooted in her opposition to censorship efforts and her previous public service—an indication that these attacks are part of a broader ideological campaign rather than any legitimate concern over judicial qualifications. The attacks on McCrea are part of an organized propaganda campaign to attack their real enemy, Gov. Little, who recently received an endorsement from President Trump.
This pattern of targeted political intimidation is now being formalized through a new effort called the Idaho Bench Project. The group offers little information about its organizers on its website. Still, it appears to be led by Senator Tammy Nichols and Brian Almon, both of whom have extensive records of promoting falsehoods, conspiracy theories, and partisan activism.
Sen. Nichols has repeatedly pushed fringe legislation based on internet conspiracy theories, including false claims about vaccines, chemtrails, and child trafficking. She has introduced bills based on unfounded conspiracy theories like chemtrails. Her record of focus on fringe ideology is so bad that even IFF President Ron Nate’s wife, Maria, said, “nobody respects Tammy Nichols” in the legislature.
Brian Almon, a former employee of the Idaho Freedom Foundation, has acknowledged receiving payment from the new Idaho Freedom Caucus, led by former Sen. Scott Herndon. Almon has been caught publishing content under fake names on social media and has a documented history of inflammatory posts, some of which have promoted white nationalist talking points. He has also received payment from the Idaho Republican Party under Chairwoman Dorothy Moon. He runs the propaganda website “Gem State Chronicle,” which works with the far-right political machine to amplify their false narratives.
Neither Nichols nor Almon has a legal background or relevant experience evaluating judges. Their interest in judicial “accountability” aligns with a larger strategy observed in recent years—using lists, indexes, and vague scoring systems to brand opponents as enemies of their movement. These tools are not neutral evaluations. They are weapons of partisan enforcement designed to be coercive and incite fear.
The Idaho Bench Project offers no clear standards for judicial excellence, nor does it identify violations of ethics or constitutional law. Its intent appears to mirror other so-called “accountability” tools used by far-right political groups in Idaho to intimidate public servants—tools like the Idaho Freedom Index and the AI-generated Idaho GOP Scorecard created by deceptively named “Stop Idaho RINOs”.
There is no disclosure on who is funding Nichols and Almon’s judicial purity index.
These indexes are not grounded in objective evaluation; they are designed to pressure officials into compliance with a rigid ideological agenda. The methodology is lacks transparency, the criteria frequently shift without explanation, and the outcomes serve the political goals of those who fund and promote them. The Idaho Bench Project appears poised to do the same—using a vague rating system to coerce judges into rulings that align with Christian nationalist ideology. There is no evidence that this project reflects any actual legal expertise, judicial standards, or constitutional principles. It’s another political weapon designed to help the far-right political machine control public policy regardless of what Idaho citizens want.
This project must be understood in the context of the far-right playbook that’s been deployed over the years in Idaho, which has been responsible for the toxic political environment of late. The same network that has taken control of the Idaho GOP, disrupted school board meetings, and fueled aggressive primary challenges against good Republican legislators is now applying that same confrontational political tactics to the judicial branch.
What these tactics create is a hostile environment for public service. Judges who follow the Constitution and the rule of law may now have to weigh each ruling against the likelihood of being added to a list curated by anonymous political operatives with no accountability and no legal expertise.
Think of it this way: if a judge rules against the next Ammon Bundy for violating the law, they will likely get a negative score. If a family court judge does not rule in favor of a father who kept their young child from their mother without consent, while allegedly hiding the child at a far-right senator’s home, the judge could potentially get dinged on this bogus scorecard. See the problem here?
The Idaho judiciary is not immune to public opinion, but it is supposed to be immune to coercion. When judges begin to fear political consequences for lawful rulings, the system no longer protects the rights of the individual. It merely enforces the will of the loudest faction.
Strict codes govern the conduct of Idaho’s judges. They are required to disqualify themselves when impartiality might reasonably be called into question. They are prohibited from participating in partisan political activity. Their responsibility is to the law—not to a political machine.
The current effort to undermine judicial integrity is about enforcing obedience to a puritanical group of zealots. The far right in Idaho has already reshaped the legislative branch and continues to try to take over the executive branch. The judiciary remains one of the few institutions still bound by process, precedent, and constitutional limits.
This project and the propaganda efforts behind it must be exposed, understood, and rejected—before the damage becomes irreversible.
About the Author
Gregory Graf is the creator of Political Potatoes and a lifelong conservative Republican. His articles often criticize the hypocrisy committed by far-right grifters who’ve taken control of the Idaho GOP and inaccurately define what it means to be a Republican.
Do you want to help support Political Potatoes? Please consider upgrading to a paid subscription and/or leave a tip 😊 Your support keeps this work going and is appreciated.
Disclaimer
The following is intended to convey an opinion on newsworthy events of public concern regarding public figures and/or public officials in exercising their official duties. No implications or inferences—beyond those explicitly stated in the preceding— are intended to be conveyed or endorsed by the Author. Wherever available, hyperlinks have been provided to allow readers to directly access any underlying assertions of fact upon which this opinion is based.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Gregory Graf
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://idahoconservatives.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.
