On October 20, 2026, Acting Alaska Attorney General Cori Mills filed an amicus brief in the case American First Legal Foundation v Alaska Judicial Council, in which American First Legal (AFL) sued the Alaska Judicial Council after the Council failed to provide information following a public records request. The request sought records regarding the application of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the judicial selection process.
The Alaska Judicial Council commands what AG Mills describes as “extraordinary gatekeeping authority over Alaska’s judiciary.” The Council decides which applicants the Governor may consider for appointment. If the Council excludes an applicant, the Governor cannot appoint that person regardless of the applicant’s qualifications or the Governor’s judgment. All judicial appointments are first screened by the Council, effectively giving AJC the first say in who is making the decisions in Alaska’s courts.
The Council’s bylaws state a commitment to making “every effort to promote diversity, including gender and ethnic diversity.” AFL wanted to know what those efforts are and how they influence the selection of judges— a reasonable request submitted under the Alaska Public Records Act (APRA). The Council confirmed the request was received but did not provide any information beyond the receipt confirmation. After 89 days without a substantive response, production, extension notice, or estimated completion date, AFL sued the Council on September 2, 2026.
AG Mills points out in the amicus brief: “Transparency serves the Council as much as anyone. If AFL’s concerns are unfounded, the records will show it, and public confidence in the merit selection system. will be stronger for the showing. The records AFL seeks—including scoring criteria, applicant evaluations, and communications concerning demographic considerations— may reveal whether the Council evaluates applicants according to lawful, merit-based criteria.”
However, the Council seems to insist that it “is an independent constitutional council,” outside of, at least, the executive branch if not all branches. AFL argues this is false, pointing to Article IV of the Alaska Constitution, the Judiciary Article, which creates the Alaska Judicial Council and the fact that the Council is chaired ex officio by the Chief Justice. “The Defendant is, without a doubt, an agency of the judicial
branch,” states AFL in their response to the Council’s motion to dismiss.
“The Alaska Public Records Act applies to the Alaska Judicial Council by its own terms,” concludes AG Mills. “The Council’s rulemaking authority does not permit it to narrow the Act, and its bylaws cannot substitute categorical labels for the document-specific showing Alaska law requires.”
The case is before the Superior Court for the State of Alaska, Third Judicial District at Anchorage, with Judge Herman G. Walker, Jr. presiding.
