Justice Sanders responds
Washington Supreme Court Justice Richard Sanders has responded to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer's article that said he could benefit from his ruling in Yousoufian v. Sims. Justice Sanders disputes the article's implications.
The truth, however, is another matter. I will not gain from the decision; the Court’s own ethics advisor advised I need not recuse myself on public record act cases and my vote was not determinative.
. . . As the court’s ethics advisor told me, just because a judge is getting a divorce is no reason for him to be disqualified on all divorce cases. And there is another ethical provision not mentioned which states it is the ethical duty of the judge to hear cases properly before him when disqualification is not required. In general recusals are discouraged except in clear instances where recusal is required. I have recused in many cases where I thought the rules required it, but didn’t need to here.
UPDATE: I'm a day late posting this, but the Court of Appeals hearing Justice Sanders' case says it does not have the authority to apply the Yousoufian ruling to his own case.
