The June 2026 primary election marks an important moment for San Francisco Superior Court judges, with around two dozen potentially facing reelection. About half of those up for reelection have backgrounds as public defenders, which can sometimes lead to more lenient approaches in areas like sentencing, favoring diversion programs over full trials, and allowing trial delays that help defendants earn “2-for-1” credit for time served in pretrial detention. Previous coverage has highlighted how diversion programs, granted by judges, have been linked to higher rates of recidivism in San Francisco.
Key filing deadlines are approaching quickly: the signature-in-lieu and the Declaration of Intention are due by Feb. 4. If an incumbent judge doesn’t file for reelection, challengers get an extra five days to submit their paperwork. To qualify as a judicial challenger in California, a candidate needs at least 10 years of law practice in the state right before the filing date.
A 2025 study of San Francisco voters found that most recognized judges play a key role in public safety. However, voting decisions are often complicated by limited information about judges’ records and by reliance on indirect cues such as party affiliation or media endorsements.
In most cases, incumbent judges in San Francisco run unopposed, meaning their names don’t appear on the ballot and they are automatically reelected. When challengers do step forward, certain incumbents could face real vulnerability, especially in light of controversial rulings.
Voters were surveyed on their likelihood to reelect specific judges based on high-profile cases and “soft on crime” leanings, such as career backgrounds as public defenders.
Judge Michelle Tong received 60 percent “unlikely to reelect” based on her custody ruling that “allowed a parent with a history of domestic violence to take a child to be taken out of the country, who was then kidnapped and never returned.” Currently, no challengers have filed paperwork against her.
Judge Van Aken scored 59 percent “unlikely,” stemming from a prominent case where she released a repeat offender who was later captured on surveillance video brutally attacking a woman.
Judge Gerard Sandoval had a 59 percent Top 3 Box “Unlikely to Reelect” based on releasing a serial thief charged with stealing “$16k of Walgreens goods.”
Judge Anne-Christine Massullo, former presiding judge who handled master calendar assignments, is rumored to not be seeking reelection. She garnered a 54 percent Top 3 Box “Unlikely to Reelect” based on her dismissal of over 70 cases awaiting trials caused by S.F. Superior Court delays. Massullo was succeeded as presiding judge by Rochelle C. East in 2024, who later reassigned Drug Court from Judge Michael Begert to Judge Murlene Randle, who has extensive prosecutorial experience. Judge East is also up for reelection in 2026. Under Begert (who was reelected in 2024), Drug Court referrals surged dramatically from 192 cases in 2022 to 1,908 in 2025, with roughly one-third accepted into the program. In 2025, 91 percent of those accepted into drug court were diverted to mental health programs, avoiding full trial, conviction and sentencing. Most drop out of the intensive treatment programs due to a lack of judicial and case management support and are even more likely to offend again over those that are not diverted.
Judge Brendan Conroy saw 49 percent “unlikely to reelect” connected to his dismissal of 32 out of 44 charges against 26 activists who chained themselves to the Golden Gate Bridge, disrupting traffic for hours.
Frank Noto of Stop Crime Action, whose organization runs a court watch program, was asked which judges would receive failing grades for public safety performance heading into the 2026 election. Their top mentions include Judge Michelle Tong, Judge Carolyn Gold, Judge Van Aken, and Judge Gerardo Sandoval. Noto singled out Judge Gold for decisions that repeatedly endanger public safety. In one case, she released a domestic violence defendant charged with false imprisonment and assault, with a stay-away order from his allegedly assaulted girlfriend; a week later, he was arrested for violating the order and possessing methamphetamine. Judge Gold also granted pretrial release to a repeat offender charged with firearm possession and drug dealing, despite a prior judge deeming release dangerous and a subsequent judge to later deny it. Noto also shared that Judge Sandoval granted pretrial release to a defendant who fled police with a machine gun concealed in his pants and was later arrested for murder. Sandoval has also faced criticism for minimizing fentanyl dealing, allowing repeat offenders to avoid felony charges, and having to apologize publicly for anti-Semitic comments made during his previous job as a member of the Board of Supervisors.
Other notable judges impacting public safety include Judge Maria Evangelista, who accounted for almost one-third of criminal bench warrants in the 2024–25 San Francisco Superior Court, because her department was continually releasing serial perpetrators on their own recognizance. These perpetrators then subsequently failed to reappear in court, triggering bench warrants for their arrests. Judge Evangelista has an extensive career as a public defender and is also facing reelection in 2026.
Most San Francisco Superior Court judges are poised to win reelection without opposition in 2026, as has been common in recent cycles. However, growing voter frustration with perceived lenient rulings on crime and recidivism could open the door to upsets if credible challengers file before the February deadline.