Supreme Court of Washington Blog : Supreme Court of Washington Blog : Washington Public Policy & Budget News : Freedom Foundation : WA State Tax & Labor Law Commentary & Updates

Washington Supreme Court Position 6: A Debate Between Justice Richard Sanders and Challenger Charlie Wiggins

With questions from panel members
~Peter Callaghan, Columnist, Tacoma News Tribune
~David DeWolf, Professor, Gonzaga University School of Law
~Stewart Jay, Professor, University of Washington School of Law

Tuesday evening, September 28, 2010
Washington Athletic Club • 1325 Sixth Avenue, Seattle
Doors open at 6:30, debate begins at 7:00

Drinks and hors d’oeuvres will be served

Admission to this event is free and parking in the Washington Athletic Club garage (1409 Sixth Avenue) will be validated

RSVP to Michael Bindas by Friday, September 24, 2010
by email at mbindas@ij.org or phone at (206) 341-9300

Presented by

THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY
PUGET SOUND LAWYERS CHAPTER

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A bill that would have created a pilot program for publicly-financed state Supreme Court races died in the Washington Senate yesterday. The proposal has been introduced annually since the state's hotly-contested judicial elections of 2006. Brad Shannon of The Olympian has the story here.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

"Yes," say retired Supreme Court Justice Robert Utter and attorney Charlie Wiggins. The two have an opinion piece in the Seattle Times arguing for mandatory recusal. The issue comes up because of a case out of West Virginia.

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering the question in Caperton v. Massey, in which a judge who benefited from $3 million in support refused to withdraw from the case. He then voted with two other judges to reverse a $50 million jury verdict against the company. The court will hear argument Tuesday and decide by the end of June whether the judge's participation in the case violated the due process right to an impartial judge.

Could this happen in Washington? Justice Utter and Mr. Wiggins point to judicial campaign spending in our state, which hit record levels in 2006. The authors call for a solution.

A proposed Washington state court rule now under consideration would require a judge to step down from a case if a party provided the judge with substantial campaign support. The rule is based on totaling all money spent by a party (or a party's lawyer) to support a judge's election.

Nearly half of the states in the U.S. elect their judges, so the Supreme Court's ruling will have a signficant impact.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link