Washington State Supreme Court
| Washington State Supreme Court |
|---|
|
| Court Information |
| Justices: 9 |
| Founded: 1889 |
| Location: Olympia |
| Salary |
| Associates: $247,064[1] |
| Judicial Selection |
| Method: Nonpartisan election of judges |
| Term: 6 years |
| Active justices |
Founded in 1889, the Washington Supreme Court is the state's court of last resort and has nine judgeships. The current chief judge of the court is Steven Gonzalez. In 2018, the court decided 1,269 cases.[2]
As of August 2021, four judges on the court were elected in nonpartisan elections and five were appointed by a Democratic governor.
The court is located in the Temple of Justice on the Capitol Campus in Olympia, Washington.[3]
In Washington, state supreme court justices are elected in nonpartisan elections. There are 13 states that use this selection method. To read more about the nonpartisan election of judges, click here.
Jurisdiction
The Washington supreme court has discretionary jurisdiction in hearing appeals from the court of appeals. The court has original jurisdiction on petitions against state officers and the court is authorized to review lower court decisions if the value of involved property exceeds $200, and of any value if the case involves the legality of a duty, tax, assessment, toll, municipal fine, or validity of a statute.[4]
The court may directly review a trial court decision if it involves a state officer, or if a trial court has ruled a statute or ordinance unconstitutional, if there are conflicting statutes, or if the issue is of broad public interest and requires prompt final determination. All death penalty cases are reviewed directly by the supreme court.[5]
The supreme court is the final rule-making authority for the state's courts. It administers the state court system. It also has supervisory responsibility over certain state bar activities, including disciplinary matters.[6]
The jurisdiction of the Washington State Supreme Court is defined in Article IV, Section 4 of the Washington State Constitution.
| “ | Jurisdiction
"The supreme court shall have original jurisdiction in habeas corpus, and quo warranto and mandamus as to all state officers, and appellate jurisdiction in all actions and proceedings, excepting that its appellate jurisdiction shall not extend to civil actions at law for the recovery of money or personal property when the original amount in controversy, or the value of the property does not exceed the sum of two hundred dollars ($200) unless the action involves the legality of a tax, impost, assessment, toll, municipal fine, or the validity of a statute. The supreme court shall also have power to issue writs of mandamus, review, prohibition, habeas corpus, certiorari and all other writs necessary and proper to the complete exercise of its appellate and revisory jurisdiction. Each of the judges shall have power to issue writs of habeas corpus to any part of the state upon petition by or on behalf of any person held in actual custody, and may make such writs returnable before himself, or before the supreme court, or before any superior court of the state or any judge thereof."[7][8] |
” |
| —Washington Constitution, Article IV, Section 4 | ||
Justices
The table below lists the current justices of the Washington State Supreme Court, their political party, and when they assumed office.
| Office | Name | Party | Date assumed office |
|---|---|---|---|
| Washington State Supreme Court Position 1 | Mary Yu | Nonpartisan | May 20, 2014 |
| Washington State Supreme Court Position 2 | Susan Owens | Nonpartisan | January 8, 2001 |
| Washington State Supreme Court Position 3 | Raquel Montoya-Lewis | Nonpartisan | January 6, 2020 |
| Washington State Supreme Court Position 4 | Charles W. Johnson | Nonpartisan | January 14, 1991 |
| Washington State Supreme Court Position 5 | Barbara A. Madsen | Nonpartisan | January 11, 1993 |
| Washington State Supreme Court Position 6 | G. Helen Whitener | Nonpartisan | April 24, 2020 |
| Washington State Supreme Court Position 7 | Debra Stephens | Nonpartisan | January 1, 2008 |
| Washington State Supreme Court Position 8 | Steven Gonzalez | Nonpartisan | January 1, 2012 |
| Washington State Supreme Court Position 9 | Sheryl Gordon McCloud | Nonpartisan | January 1, 2013 |
Judicial selection
- See also: Judicial selection in Washington
The nine justices of the supreme court are selected through contested nonpartisan elections and must run for re-election when their terms expire. Supreme court judges serve for six years.[9]
Qualifications
To serve on the supreme court, a judge must be:
- admitted to practice law in Washington; and
- under the age of 75.[10]
Chief justice
The chief justice of the supreme court is selected through a peer vote and has a set term of four years.[11]
Vacancies
In the event of a midterm vacancy, the governor appoints a replacement. The appointee serves until the next general election, at which point he or she may run to serve for the remainder of the predecessor's term.[12][13] If the resignation and subsequent appointment takes place after the filing period opens for that year's elections, the appointee must stand in the next year's election to remain on the bench.[14]
The map below highlights how vacancies are filled in state supreme courts across the country.
Elections
- See also: Washington Supreme Court elections
2024
- See also: Washington Supreme Court elections, 2024
The terms of three Washington Supreme Court justices will expire on January 12, 2025. The three seats were up for nonpartisan election on November 5, 2024. A primary was scheduled for August 6, 2024.
Candidates and results
Position 2
General election
General election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 2
Dave Larson and Sal Mungia ran in the general election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 2 on November 5, 2024.
Candidate | ||
| Dave Larson (Nonpartisan) | ||
| Sal Mungia (Nonpartisan) | ||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
Nonpartisan primary for Washington State Supreme Court Position 2
Sal Mungia and Dave Larson defeated Todd Bloom and David Shelvey in the primary for Washington State Supreme Court Position 2 on August 6, 2024.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | Sal Mungia (Nonpartisan) | 43.4 | 762,797 | |
| ✔ | Dave Larson (Nonpartisan) | 36.4 | 640,116 | |
| Todd Bloom (Nonpartisan) | 16.3 | 286,298 | ||
| David Shelvey (Nonpartisan) | 3.4 | 59,676 | ||
| Other/Write-in votes | 0.4 | 7,347 | ||
| Total votes: 1,756,234 | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Withdrawn or disqualified candidates
- Michelle Adams (Nonpartisan)
Position 8
General election
General election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 8
Incumbent Steven Gonzalez won election in the general election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 8 on November 5, 2024.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | Steven Gonzalez (Nonpartisan) | 97.7 | 2,148,666 | |
| Other/Write-in votes | 2.3 | 50,854 | ||
| Total votes: 2,199,520 | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
The primary election was canceled. Incumbent Steven Gonzalez advanced from the primary for Washington State Supreme Court Position 8.
Position 9
General election
General election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 9
Incumbent Sheryl Gordon McCloud won election in the general election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 9 on November 5, 2024.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | Sheryl Gordon McCloud (Nonpartisan) | 97.5 | 2,123,834 | |
| Other/Write-in votes | 2.5 | 54,280 | ||
| Total votes: 2,178,114 | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
The primary election was canceled. Incumbent Sheryl Gordon McCloud advanced from the primary for Washington State Supreme Court Position 9.
Judges not on the ballot
- Susan Owens (Position 2)
2022
- See also: Washington Supreme Court elections, 2022
Candidates and election results
Position 1
General election
General election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 1
Incumbent Mary Yu won election in the general election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 1 on November 8, 2022.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | Mary Yu (Nonpartisan) | 97.4 | 1,961,152 | |
| Other/Write-in votes | 2.6 | 52,447 | ||
| Total votes: 2,013,599 | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
The primary election was canceled. Incumbent Mary Yu advanced from the primary for Washington State Supreme Court Position 1.
Position 5
General election
General election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 5
Incumbent Barbara A. Madsen won election in the general election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 5 on November 8, 2022.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | Barbara A. Madsen (Nonpartisan) | 97.8 | 1,937,634 | |
| Other/Write-in votes | 2.2 | 43,453 | ||
| Total votes: 1,981,087 | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
The primary election was canceled. Incumbent Barbara A. Madsen advanced from the primary for Washington State Supreme Court Position 5.
Position 6
General election
General election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 6
Incumbent G. Helen Whitener won election in the general election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 6 on November 8, 2022.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | G. Helen Whitener (Nonpartisan) | 97.8 | 1,918,080 | |
| Other/Write-in votes | 2.2 | 42,740 | ||
| Total votes: 1,960,820 | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
The primary election was canceled. Incumbent G. Helen Whitener advanced from the primary for Washington State Supreme Court Position 6.
2020
- See also: Washington Supreme Court elections, 2020
Candidates and results
Position 3
General election
General election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 3
Incumbent Raquel Montoya-Lewis defeated Dave Larson in the general election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 3 on November 3, 2020.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | Raquel Montoya-Lewis (Nonpartisan) | 58.2 | 2,057,623 | |
| Dave Larson (Nonpartisan) | 41.4 | 1,462,764 | ||
| Other/Write-in votes | 0.4 | 13,661 | ||
| Total votes: 3,534,048 | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
The primary election was canceled. Incumbent Raquel Montoya-Lewis and Dave Larson advanced from the primary for Washington State Supreme Court Position 3.
Position 4
General election
General election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 4
Incumbent Charles W. Johnson won election in the general election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 4 on November 3, 2020.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | Charles W. Johnson (Nonpartisan) | 97.7 | 2,850,924 | |
| Other/Write-in votes | 2.3 | 66,407 | ||
| Total votes: 2,917,331 | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
The primary election was canceled. Incumbent Charles W. Johnson advanced from the primary for Washington State Supreme Court Position 4.
Position 6
General election
Special general election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 6
Incumbent G. Helen Whitener defeated Richard Serns in the special general election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 6 on November 3, 2020.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | G. Helen Whitener (Nonpartisan) | 66.1 | 2,263,513 | |
| Richard Serns (Nonpartisan) | 33.3 | 1,140,338 | ||
| Other/Write-in votes | 0.6 | 19,416 | ||
| Total votes: 3,423,267 | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
The primary election was canceled. Incumbent G. Helen Whitener and Richard Serns advanced from the special primary for Washington State Supreme Court Position 6.
Position 7
General election
General election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 7
Incumbent Debra Stephens won election in the general election for Washington State Supreme Court Position 7 on November 3, 2020.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | Debra Stephens (Nonpartisan) | 97.9 | 2,852,879 | |
| Other/Write-in votes | 2.1 | 60,808 | ||
| Total votes: 2,913,687 | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
The primary election was canceled. Incumbent Debra Stephens advanced from the primary for Washington State Supreme Court Position 7.
2018
- See also: Washington Supreme Court elections, 2018
Candidates and results
Washington Supreme Court 2018 elections | |
|
|
| Office | Candidates |
| Position 2 |
 Susan Owens (i)Did not make the ballot: |
| Position 8 |
Steven Gonzalez (i) Nathan Choi |
| Position 9 |
Sheryl Gordon McCloud (i) Did not make the ballot: |
2016
- Main article: Washington Supreme Court elections, 2016
General election candidates
Justice, Position 1
■ Mary Yu
■ David DeWolf
Justice, Position 5
■ Barbara Madsen
■ Greg Zempel
Justice, Position 6
■ Charlie Wiggins
■ Dave Larson
Election results
November 8 general election
| Washington Supreme Court, Position 1, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Candidate | Vote % | Votes |
| Mary Yu Incumbent |
57.33% | 1,577,495 |
| David DeWolf | 42.67% | 1,174,263 |
| Total Votes (100% reporting) | 2,751,758 | |
| Source: Washington Secretary of State Official Results | ||
| Washington Supreme Court, Position 5, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Candidate | Vote % | Votes |
| Barbara Madsen Incumbent |
61.95% | 1,679,786 |
| Greg Zempel | 38.05% | 1,031,698 |
| Total Votes (100% reporting) | 2,711,484 | |
| Source: Washington Secretary of State Official Results | ||
| Washington Supreme Court, Position 6, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Candidate | Vote % | Votes |
| Charlie Wiggins Incumbent |
57.49% | 1,535,554 |
| Dave Larson | 42.51% | 1,135,285 |
| Total Votes (100% reporting) | 2,670,839 | |
| Source: Washington Secretary of State Official Results | ||
August 2 primary election
Incumbent Justice Barbara Madsen and challenger Greg Zempel defeated John Scannell and advanced to the November 8 general election.
| Washington Supreme Court Primary, Position 5, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Candidate | Vote % | Votes |
| Barbara Madsen Incumbent |
63.90% | 759,475 |
| Greg Zempel |
29.71% | 353,149 |
| John Scannell | 6.38% | 75,849 |
| Total Votes (2000 of 2000 reporting: 100%) | 1,188,473 | |
| Source: Washington Secretary of State Official Results | ||
2014
| Unopposed | Judge Mary Yu (Position 1) |
|---|
| Unopposed | Judge Mary Fairhurst (Position 3) |
|---|
Position 4
| Candidate | Incumbency | Primary Vote | Election Vote |
|---|---|---|---|
Charles W. Johnson | Yes | 73.3% | |
| Eddie Yoon | No | 26.7%  |
Position 7
| Candidate | Incumbency | Primary Vote | Election Vote |
|---|---|---|---|
| John Scannell | No | 21.9% | |
| Debra Stephens | Yes | 78.1% |
- Election history, 2006-2012 (click to expand)
2012
Candidate Incumbency Office Primary Vote Election Vote Bruce Hilyer No Position 9 25.6% Bruce O. Danielson No Position 8 43.1% Douglas W. McQuaid No Position 2 24.14% John Ladenburg No Position 9 15.31% Richard Sanders No Position 9 27.48% 44.76% Scott Stafne Sheryl McCloud No Position 9 31.61% 55.24% Steven Gonzalez Yes Position 8 56.9% 100% Susan Owens Yes Position 2 63.5% 100% 2010
- See also: 2010 State Supreme Court elections
Incumbent Richard Sanders was defeated by challenger Charlie Wiggins.
Washington State Supreme Court
2010 General election resultsCandidates Votes Percent Charlie Wiggins n/a 50.34% Richard Sanders n/a n/a Incumbent James Johnson ran uncontested and was re-elected.
Washington State Supreme Court
2010 General election resultsCandidates Votes Percent James Johnson n/a n/a Incumbent Barbara Madsen ran uncontested and was re-elected.
Washington State Supreme Court
2010 General election resultsCandidates Votes Percent Barbara Madsen n/a n/a 2008
- See also: State Supreme Court elections, 2008
Incumbent Debra Stephens ran uncontested and was re-elected.
Washington State Supreme Court
2008 General election resultsCandidates Votes Percent Debra Stephens n/a n/a Incumbent Charles Johnson competed against James Beecher and Frank Vulliet and was re-elected.
Washington State Supreme Court
2008 General election resultsCandidates Votes Percent Charles Johnson n/a n/a James Beecher n/a n/a Frank Vulliet n/a n/a Incumbent Mary Fairhurst competed against Michael Bond and was re-elected.
Washington State Supreme Court
2008 General election resultsCandidates Votes Percent Mary Fairhurst n/a n/a Michael Bond n/a n/a
Caseloads
The table below details the number of cases filed with the court and the number of dispositions (decisions) the court reached in each year.[2]
| Washington Supreme Court caseload data | ||
|---|---|---|
| Year | Filings | Dispositions |
| 2021 | 1,173 | 1,144 |
| 2020 | 1,361 | 1,249 |
| 2019 | 1,397 | 1,306 |
| 2018 | 1,388 | 1,269 |
| 2017 | 1,413 | 1,500 |
| 2016 | 1,408 | 1,404 |
| 2015 | 1,585 | 1,402 |
| 2014 | 1,530 | 2,949 |
| 2013 | 1,578 | 1,509 |
| 2012 | 1,479 | 1,439 |
| 2011 | 1,515 | 1,503 |
| 2010 | 1,556 | 1,578 |
| 2009 | 1,570 | 1,832 |
| 2008 | 1,607 | 1651 |
| 2007 | 1,468 | 1,382 |
Analysis
Ballotpedia Courts: Determiners and Dissenters (2021)
In 2020, Ballotpedia published Ballotpedia Courts: Determiners and Dissenters, a study on how state supreme court justices decided the cases that came before them. Our goal was to determine which justices ruled together most often, which frequently dissented, and which courts featured the most unanimous or contentious decisions.
The study tracked the position taken by each state supreme court justice in every case they decided in 2020, then tallied the number of times the justices on the court ruled together. We identified the following types of justices:
- We considered two justices opinion partners if they frequently concurred or dissented together throughout the year.
- We considered justices a dissenting minority if they frequently opposed decisions together as a -1 minority.
- We considered a group of justices a determining majority if they frequently determined cases by a +1 majority throughout the year.
- We considered a justice a lone dissenter if he or she frequently dissented alone in cases throughout the year.
Summary of cases decided in 2020
- Number of justices: 9
- Number of cases: 66
- Percentage of cases with a unanimous ruling: 59.1%% (39)
- Justice most often writing the majority opinion: Justices Gonzalez and Madsen (N/A)
- Per curiam decisions: 1
- Concurring opinions: 15
- Justice with most concurring opinions: Justice Gonzalez (5)
- Dissenting opinions: 24
- Justice with most dissenting opinions: Justice Madsen (7)
For the study's full set of findings in Washington, click here.
Ballotpedia Courts: State Partisanship (2020)
- See also: Ballotpedia Courts: State Partisanship
Last updated: June 15, 2020
In 2020, Ballotpedia published Ballotpedia Courts: State Partisanship, a study examining the partisan affiliation of all state supreme court justices in the country as of June 15, 2020.
The study presented Confidence Scores that represented our confidence in each justice's degree of partisan affiliation, based on a variety of factors. This was not a measure of where a justice fell on the political or ideological spectrum, but rather a measure of how much confidence we had that a justice was or had been affiliated with a political party. To arrive at confidence scores we analyzed each justice's past partisan activity by collecting data on campaign finance, past political positions, party registration history, as well as other factors. The five categories of Confidence Scores were:
- Strong Democrat
- Mild Democrat
- Indeterminate[15]
- Mild Republican
- Strong Republican
We used the Confidence Scores of each justice to develop a Court Balance Score, which attempted to show the balance among justices with Democratic, Republican, and Indeterminate Confidence Scores on a court. Courts with higher positive Court Balance Scores included justices with higher Republican Confidence Scores, while courts with lower negative Court Balance Scores included justices with higher Democratic Confidence Scores. Courts closest to zero either had justices with conflicting partisanship or justices with Indeterminate Confidence Scores.[16]
Washington had a Court Balance Score of -5.67, indicating Democrat control of the court. In total, the study found that there were 15 states with Democrat-controlled courts, 27 states with Republican-controlled courts, and eight states with Split courts. The map below shows the court balance score of each state.
Bonica and Woodruff campaign finance scores (2012)
In October 2012, political science professors Adam Bonica and Michael Woodruff of Stanford University attempted to determine the partisan outlook of state supreme court justices in their paper, "State Supreme Court Ideology and 'New Style' Judicial Campaigns." A score above 0 indicated a more conservative-leaning ideology while scores below 0 were more liberal. The state Supreme Court of Washington was given a campaign finance score (CFscore), which was calculated for judges in October 2012. At that time, Washington received a score of -0.91. Based on the justices selected, Washington was the 5th most liberal court. The study was based on data from campaign contributions by judges themselves, the partisan leaning of contributors to the judges, or—in the absence of elections—the ideology of the appointing body (governor or legislature). This study was not a definitive label of a justice but rather an academic gauge of various factors.[17]
Noteworthy cases
The following are noteworthy cases heard before the Washington Supreme Court. For a full list of opinions published by the court, click here. Know of a case we should cover here? Let us know by emailing us.
| • Underfunding education (2012-2015) Judge(s):Justice Debra Stephens (McCleary v. State of Washington, Supreme Court No. 84362-7) | Click for summary→ | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
In McLeary v. State, the Washington Supreme Court found that the state was not adequately funding K-12 education in accordance with the state constitution, which states:
The high court confirmed a lower court's ruling on January 5, 2012, and required the state legislature to adjust the budget to provide more funding for education. Specifically, it explained that the legislature was required to produce a "phase-in plan for achieving the State's mandate to fully fund basic education and demonstrate that its budget meets its plan."[18] This requirement was reiterated by a court order in January 2014 that required a plan to be submitted to the court by April 30, 2014. When this deadline was not met, the court found the state to be in contempt on September 11, 2014, but delayed sanctions until the 2015 legislative session.[19] In April 2015, the court granted an extension on sanctions when legislators went into special session to negotiate a two-year state budget. The court granted another extension on June 8, 2015 and ordered the state to file its annual progress report with the court, along with its plan to fund the 2017-2018 school year, by the earlier of July 27 or 15 days after the adjournment of the special session.[20] When the state missed this extended deadline, the court on August 13, 2015, ordered sanctions of $100,000 per day so long as the state violated the court's January 2014 order.[21] The court planned to collect the fines totaling $700,000 per week and put them in an education fund until a new education plan was approved.[22] Education funding problems and stalled contract negotiations led to Seattle's first teacher strike in 30 years. Teachers went on strike during the 2015-2016 school year's first week of classes.[22] | |||||||
 For more information on education policy, visit Policypedia. | |||||||
| • Operation of charter schools (2014-2015) Judge(s):Chief Justice Barbara Madsen (League of Women Voters, et al. v. State of Washington, Supreme Court No. 89714-0) | Click for summary→ |
|---|---|
|
On September 4, 2015, the Washington Supreme Court declared the state's Charter Schools Act unconstitutional. Under the Act, the daily operation of charter schools is not governed by local school boards and charter schools receive funding from the same source as public schools. Deeply concerned over the lack of local control and fiscal impact of implementing the Act, the League of Women Voters of Washington, parents, teachers and other groups sued the State of Washington in King County Superior Court. Initiative 1240, the basis for the Charter Schools Act, was approved by Washington state voters in November 2012.[23] The trial court held that charter schools are not "common schools" under article IX of Washington's Constitution so the funding required for common schools under the state constitution could not be used to fund charter schools. The trial court also determined that the funding provisions were severable, or could be separated from the Act, rendering it otherwise constitutional. All parties sought review. The Washington Supreme Court granted review and held that the provisions for funding charter schools as common schools were integral to the Act, and therefore not severable. Legislation is unconstitutional in its entirety if an invalid provision cannot be severed.[23] The supreme court did not indicate what would happen to the state's charter schools and sent the case back to King County Superior Court for an appropriate order.[23] The ruling affects the state's nine charter schools and about 1,200 students.[22] The 6-3 decision in the charter school case was issued days before the start of the 2015-2016 school year.[23] During the same week, Seattle faced its first teacher strike in 30 years.[22] In August, the Washington Supreme Court ordered $100,000 per day sanctions until a new state education plan was approved.[21] | |
| For more information on education policy, visit Policypedia. | |
| • No-contact order (2008) Judge(s):Justice Tom Chambers (State v. Warren, No. 79356-5) | Click for summary→ |
|---|---|
|
In State v. Warren the court upheld a lower court sentence that permanently banned a convicted child molester from contacting his wife, who was not a direct victim of his crimes. The decision was 8-1, with Richard Sanders the only to dissent. Richard H. Warren, who was convicted of child molestation and child rape against two stepdaughters, in two separate King County Superior Court trials in 2003, had argued that the no-contact order imposed as a sentence after those trials was not "reasonably related" to his crime, and was an unconstitutional violation of his marriage rights. The court disagreed, saying that based on the evidence, limiting Warren's marriage rights was reasonably necessary to achieve the compelling state interest of protecting the girls and their mother.[24] | |
| • Prisoners and public records (2008) Judge(s):Justice Barbara Madsen (Livingston v. Cedeno, No. 79608-4) | Click for summary→ |
|---|---|
|
The Court issued a 5-4 ruling in July 2008 holding that while prisoners may make open records requests, and that the state must fulfill them, the correctional facility is under no obligation to actually deliver the document to the felon if the information is considered contraband. "The Public Records Act does not limit the department's discretion in prohibiting entry of public records that it reasonably deems inappropriate in a prison setting," Justice Madsen wrote for the majority. Joining her were Chief Justice Gerry Alexander and Justices Bobbe Bridge, Mary Fairhurst and Charles Johnson.[25] Dissenters were led by James Johnson. | |
| • Same-sex marriage (2006) Judge(s):Justice Barbara Madsen (Andersen v. King County, No. 75934-1) | Click for summary→ |
|---|---|
|
In a July 2006 decision that split 5-4, the court upheld the state's ban on same-sex marriage. The decision combined two cases where trial courts had struck down the 1998 state law banning gay marriages. 19 same-sex couples were the plaintiffs in the case. They sought the right to get married or to have their marriages from other jurisdictions recognized in Washington. Six different opinions were issued by the justices of the court.[26] Same-sex marriage was approved by voters in Washington in 2012 with the ballot measure known as Referendum 74.[27] | |
| • Public disclosure (2004 & 2009) Judge(s):Justice Debra Stephens (Rental Housing Association of Puget Sound v. City of Des Moines, No. 80532-6) | Click for summary→ |
|---|---|
|
May 2004: In the 5-4 opinion, the state supreme court ruled that attorney-client privilege trumps the state public-disclosure law for government agencies and their attorneys. Therefore the communications between the two would not need to be publicly available. The Public Disclosure Act was approved by voters in a 1972 ballot initiative. The majority said there was a clear exemption for such information in a 1987 amendment to the act. In dissent, Justice Gerry Alexander said the decision "renders ineffectual the (law's) strong mandate to agencies that they must disclose public information." News and open-government organizations reacted angrily to the ruling.[28] January 2009: In Rental Housing Association of Puget Sound v. City of Des Moines, Justice Debra Stephens wrote the 8-1 majority opinion. The court ruled that a person requesting records has one year to sue an agency whose response to the request is found inadequate by the requester. Public information advocates hailed the decision.[29] October 2009: In City of Federal Way v. Koenig, written by Justice Susan Owens, the court held that Washington's Public Disclosure Act does not apply to state judicial records. Owens was joined in her opinion by Charles Johnson, Mary Fairhurst, James Johnson, Tom Chambers and Justice Pro Tem Joel M. Penoyar.[30] | |
Ethics
The Washington Code of Judicial Conduct sets forth ethical guidelines and principles for the conduct of judges and judicial candidates in Washington. It consists of four canons:
- Canon 1: "A Judge Shall Uphold and Promote the Independence, Integrity, and Impartiality of the Judiciary, and Shall Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety"
- Canon 2: "A Judge Should Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially, Competently, and Diligently"
- Canon 3: "A Judge Shall Conduct the Judge’s Personal and Extrajudicial Activities to Minimize the Risk of Conflict with the Obligations of Judicial Office"
- Canon 4: "A Judge or Candidate for Judicial Office Shall not Engage in Political or Campaign Activity that is Inconsistent with the Independence, Integrity, or Impartiality of the Judiciary"[31]
The full text of the Washington Code of Judicial Conduct can be found here.
Removal of judges
Judges in Washington may be removed in one of two ways:
- By the supreme court after an investigation by the commission on judicial conduct; an investigation may be sparked by a complaint of judicial misconduct or because of judicial disability. The commission holds a hearing and evaluates a case, after which it may recommend supreme court action.
- By a joint resolution of the legislature, with the consent of three-fourths of each house.[32]
History of the court
Washington became a part of the Oregon territory in 1848. The territory encompassed much of present-day Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. A territorial government was put into operation in 1849 that included a supreme court, district courts, probate courts, and justices of the peace, as provided in the Territorial Act. The supreme court consisted of three justices, appointed by the U.S. president with consent of the U.S. senate, for four-year terms. The territory was divided into three circuits and the justices were required to ride circuit as district court judges throughout the year. Appeals of district court decisions were heard by the territorial supreme court. Appeals from the territorial supreme court could be taken to the U.S. Supreme Court.[33][34]
In 1853, Washington became its own territory with its own supreme court. President Franklin Pierce nominated three judges to the new territorial supreme court in the same year. Governor Isaac Stevens designated three judicial districts and fixed dates for holding court in the three districts. In 1854 the territorial legislature created a fourth district and added a fourth supreme court judge. Judges were responsible for riding circuit as trial court judges throughout the territorial districts, which the legislature changed with some frequency. As circuit court judges and supreme court judges, supreme court judges heard appeals to cases they had previously decided. Justices of the peace, probate courts, and district courts also operated in the territory.[35]
In 1889, Washington achieved statehood. The Washington Constitution of 1889 remains the state's constitution today. The supreme court was composed of five justices selected by voters through partisan elections. Justices were no longer responsible for riding the trial court circuit. In 1905, due to the crowded backlog, the court was expanded to seven justices by the state legislature, and in 1909 it was expanded to nine, where it remains today.[36]
In 1907 the legislature established a direct nonpartisan election system for justices. In 1952 Washington HJR 6, Judge Retirement Age Amendment (1952) passed, providing that judges must retire at 75 years of age.[37]
Until the court of appeals was created in 1969, supreme court justices usually met in groups of five to expedite court business. Since then, the court meets as a whole.[38]
Notable firsts
- 1981: Carolyn Dimmick became the court's first female justice.[39]
- 1988: Charles Z. Smith (1927-2016) became the first black justice of the Washington Supreme Court.[40]
Courts in Washington
- See also: Courts in Washington
In Washington, there are two federal district courts, a state supreme court, a state court of appeals, and trial courts. These courts serve different purposes, which are outlined in the sections below.
Click a link for information about that court type.
The image below depicts the flow of cases through Washington's state court system. Cases typically originate in the trial courts and can be appealed to courts higher up in the system.
Party control of Washington state government
A state government trifecta is a term that describes single-party government, when one political party holds the governor's office and has majorities in both chambers of the legislature in a state government. A state supreme court plays a role in the checks and balances system of a state government.
Washington has a Democratic trifecta. The Democratic Party controls the office of governor and both chambers of the state legislature.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ The salary of the chief justice may be higher than an associate justice.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Washington Courts, “Caseloads of the Courts of Washington,” accessed August 18, 2021
- ↑ Washington Courts, "Visit the Supreme Court," accessed August 18, 2021
- ↑ Washington Courts,"The Supreme Court," accessed July 1, 2024
- ↑ Washington Courts,"The Supreme Court," accessed July 1, 2024
- ↑ Washington Courts,"The Supreme Court," accessed July 1, 2024
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 Washington State Legislature, "Washington Constitution," accessed March 30, 2014
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ National Center for State Courts, "Judicial Selection Methods," accessed August 18, 2021
- ↑ National Center for State Courts, "Judicial Selection Methods," accessed August 18, 2021
- ↑ National Center for State Courts, "Judicial Selection Methods," accessed August 18, 2021
- ↑ Washington State Legislature, "Washington State Constitution," accessed September 24, 2014 (Scroll to Article IV, Section 3)
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedgeneral - ↑ National Center for State Courts, "Judicial Selection Methods," accessed August 18, 2021
- ↑ An Indeterminate score indicates that there is either not enough information about the justice’s partisan affiliations or that our research found conflicting partisan affiliations.
- ↑ The Court Balance Score is calculated by finding the average partisan Confidence Score of all justices on a state supreme court. For example, if a state has justices on the state supreme court with Confidence Scores of 4, -2, 2, 14, -2, 3, and 4, the Court Balance is the average of those scores: 3.3. Therefore, the Confidence Score on the court is Mild Republican. The use of positive and negative numbers in presenting both Confidence Scores and Court Balance Scores should not be understood to that either a Republican or Democratic score is positive or negative. The numerical values represent their distance from zero, not whether one score is better or worse than another.
- ↑ Stanford University, "State Supreme Court Ideology and 'New Style' Judicial Campaigns," October 31, 2012
- ↑ The Supreme Court of Washington, "McCleary v. State," September 11, 2014
- ↑ Seattle Met, "Jolt: WA Supreme Court Says State is in "Contempt" for Not Fully Funding K-12 Schools," September 11, 2014
- ↑ McLeary v. State of Washington, "Order," June 8, 2015
- ↑ 21.0 21.1 McLeary v. State of Washington, "Order," August 13, 2015
- ↑ 22.0 22.1 22.2 22.3 The New York Times, "Strike by Seattle Teachers Adds to School Turmoil in State," September 8, 2015
- ↑ 23.0 23.1 23.2 23.3 The Supreme Court of Washington, "Opinion: League of Women voters, et al. v. State of Washington," September 4, 2015
- ↑ Seattle Times, "Wash Court OKs contact ban for non-victim spouse," November 20, 2008
- ↑ Oregon Live, "WA court: Public records can be kept from inmates," July 3, 2008
- ↑ New York Times, "Washington Court Upholds Ban on Gay Marriage," July 26, 2006
- ↑ CNN.com, "Washington voters pass same-sex marriage, CNN projects," November 9, 2012
- ↑ MRSC.org, "Opinion: Hangartner v. City of Seattle," May 13, 2004
- ↑ Ballotpedia.org, "Rental Housing Association of Puget Sound v. City of Des Moines," accessed October 30, 2014
- ↑ Federal Way Mirror, "Courts are exempt from state's Public Records Act," October 26, 2009
- ↑ Washington Courts, "Washington State Court Rules: Code of Judicial Conduct," accessed August 15, 2015
- ↑ American Judicature Society, "Methods of Judicial Selection: Washington, Removal of Judges," accessed August 15, 2015
- ↑ State of Oregon Law Library,"Oregon Courts Under the Territorial Government," accessed June 28, 2024
- ↑ State of Oregon Law Library,"Oregon Courts Under the Territorial Government," accessed June 28, 2024
- ↑ University of Washington School of Law,"The Courts and Early Bar of the Washington Territory," accessed June 28, 2024
- ↑ Washington Courts,"Brief History of the Washington Supreme Court," accessed June 28, 2024
- ↑ Oxford University Press,"The Washington State Constitution," accessed June 28, 2024
- ↑ Oxford University Press,"The Washington State Constitution," accessed June 28, 2024
- ↑ Washington Secretary of State, "Carolyn Dimmick: A judge for all seasons," accessed October 30, 2014
- ↑ Washington Secretary of State, "Charles Z. Smith: Trailblazer," accessed October 30, 2014
Federal courts:
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals • U.S. District Court: Eastern District of Washington, Western District of Washington • U.S. Bankruptcy Court: Eastern District of Washington, Western District of Washington
State courts:
Washington Supreme Court • Washington Court of Appeals • Washington Superior Court • Washington District Courts • Washington Municipal Courts
State resources:
Courts in Washington • Washington judicial elections • Judicial selection in Washington
| ||||||||