- Today
- Holidays
- Birthdays
- Reminders
- Cities
- Atlanta
- Austin
- Baltimore
- Berwyn
- Beverly Hills
- Birmingham
- Boston
- Brooklyn
- Buffalo
- Charlotte
- Chicago
- Cincinnati
- Cleveland
- Columbus
- Dallas
- Denver
- Detroit
- Fort Worth
- Houston
- Indianapolis
- Knoxville
- Las Vegas
- Los Angeles
- Louisville
- Madison
- Memphis
- Miami
- Milwaukee
- Minneapolis
- Nashville
- New Orleans
- New York
- Omaha
- Orlando
- Philadelphia
- Phoenix
- Pittsburgh
- Portland
- Raleigh
- Richmond
- Rutherford
- Sacramento
- Salt Lake City
- San Antonio
- San Diego
- San Francisco
- San Jose
- Seattle
- Tampa
- Tucson
- Washington
Reform Group Launches Campaign to Recall 6 OC Probate and Family Court Judges
Statewide group accusing the jurists of bias and judicial misconduct gets the green light to begin collecting signatures to force a recall election.
Published on Feb. 24, 2026
Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›
A grassroots group advocating judicial reform, the California Family Law Naked Truth, has received approval to begin circulating petitions to recall six Orange County probate and family court judges. The group alleges the judges have shown bias and disregard for due process. The judges deny the accusations, calling the recall effort an unwarranted attack by litigants unhappy with their rulings.
Why it matters
This recall campaign highlights ongoing tensions between judicial reform advocates and the Orange County court system. The group claims widespread issues of bias and misconduct, while the judges argue the effort is politically motivated by dissatisfied litigants. The outcome could have significant implications for the county's probate and family courts.
The details
The California Family Law Naked Truth group, headed by Christine Fleming, has been granted approval to begin collecting signatures to recall six Orange County judges: Maria D. Hernandez, Carol Henson, Julie Palafox, Stephen Hicklin, Mary Kreber-Varipapa, and Kimberly Carasso. The group alleges the judges have shown bias, failed to hear evidence, and discriminated against women and self-represented litigants. The judges deny the accusations, with Hicklin noting the recall is an attempt by unhappy litigants to unseat 'fair and experienced judges' through politics rather than the appeals process.
- The recall notices were formally delivered to the judges in mid-December 2025.
- The signatures must be submitted to the Registrar of Voters Office by 5 p.m. on July 23, 2026, for all judges except Kreber-Varipapa, whose deadline is August 2, 2026.
The players
California Family Law Naked Truth
A grassroots group advocating for judicial reform, headed by Christine Fleming. The group claims to represent 7,500 affected families statewide and is planning recall attempts in several California counties.
Christine Fleming
The head of the California Family Law Naked Truth group, who says she experienced judicial bias and misconduct firsthand during a case involving a child she raised as a grandson.
Maria D. Hernandez
A former Orange County Superior Court Presiding Judge who is one of the six judges targeted for recall.
Mark Rosen
The attorney representing all six of the judges targeted for recall.
Stephen Hicklin
One of the six Orange County judges targeted for recall, who argues the effort is an attempt by unhappy litigants to unseat 'fair and experienced judges' through politics.
What they’re saying
“Instead of appealing, these litigants are trying to unseat fair and experienced judges for trying to do their jobs.”
— Stephen Hicklin, Judge (ocregister.com)
“We hear from so many people who have had these challenges in the courtrooms.”
— Christine Fleming, Head of California Family Law Naked Truth (ocregister.com)
What’s next
The signatures must be turned over to the Registrar of Voters Office by 5 p.m. on July 23, 2026, for all the judges except Kreber-Varipapa, whose deadline is August 2, 2026. If enough valid signatures are gathered, a recall election will be scheduled.
The takeaway
This recall campaign highlights the ongoing tensions between judicial reform advocates and the Orange County court system. The outcome could have significant implications for the county's probate and family courts, as the group's allegations of widespread bias and misconduct clash with the judges' claims that the effort is politically motivated.


