SEATTLE. Voters trying to research the five Washington Supreme Court races on this fall's ballot have fewer places to turn, according to KUOW, because a shrinking number of judicial candidates are seeking in-depth vetting from their peers in bar associations.
Judicial candidates are prohibited from saying how they would rule on specific cases, which makes independent ratings one of the few research tools voters have. Yet this year only one candidate out of a primary field of 16, King County Superior Court Judge Sean O'Donnell, sought a rating from the King County Bar Association, a contrast with previous years.
O'Donnell said voters would be better served if every candidate participated in rigorous vetting so qualifications could be compared from an impartial source. Attorney Colin Mieling, who co-leads the bar's evaluation committee, described a robust process in which volunteers interview candidates, research their work history and volunteer efforts, and call dozens of references before rating them from exceptionally well qualified to not qualified. When candidates skip the process, he said, it takes away a data point the public and practitioners rely on.
O'Donnell's opponent, Washington Appeals Court Judge Ian Birk, did not seek a King County Bar rating, though his campaign noted high ratings from other statewide groups including Washington Women Lawyers. Candidate Dave Larson, rated well qualified by the King County Bar in 2016, also declined this year, saying via email that fairness concerns have been raised about some of the groups and renewing his earlier proposal for a centralized, nonpartisan Judicial Elections Commission.
Larson's opponent, incumbent Justice Theo Angelis, who was appointed to the Washington Supreme Court this year by Gov. Bob Ferguson, said he skipped the evaluation because of his long history with the organization, including chairing its committee on fair campaign practices, and did not want the evaluators to feel biased in his favor. Both Angelis and Larson have received positive ratings from other statewide bar associations.
In the open race for Position 3, neither candidate sought any ratings. Mason County Superior Court Judge David Stevens called the associations biased in his opinion and said other special interest organizations have filled the information gap. The campaign of King County Superior Court Judge Jaime Hawk, a former ACLU attorney, said her schedule as a candidate and sitting judge did not easily align with adding evaluation interviews, but noted she attended the bar's candidate forum and provided letters confirming high ratings from the King County Bar and four other statewide associations, including exceptionally well qualified marks from QLaw and the Latina/o Bar Association before her 2022 appointment.
Retired King County Superior Court Judge John Erlick told KUOW there is a dearth of information for voters on judges, leading many to skip judicial races. He called the evaluation process pretty grueling but said he was extraordinarily impressed with the committee's due diligence, adding that more information is better for voters even if some organizations have biases.
Attorney Diego Rondón Ichikawa, who helps oversee judicial evaluations for the Latina/o Bar Association of Washington, said ratings are not endorsements and are not contingent on political stances. His organization has posted ratings for four current Supreme Court candidates: Angelis, Birk, Larson and O'Donnell.