July 7, 2012 — There is at least one statewide
race that will be decided in the Aug. 7 primary, and it
deserves your attention. Voters will choose a justice
for the state Supreme Court, which surely has to rank as
one of the most important and far-reaching decisions put
before the state’s voters in the first week of August.
It is not the custom of this page to endorse candidates,
but for the purpose of voter education it would be
worthwhile to relay our experience and impressions of
Justice Steven Gonzalez.
Voters will choose between the incumbent Gonzalez and
his sole opponent, Kitsap County attorney
Bruce C. Danielson.
Under Washington law, if one candidate in a judicial
race receives more than 50 percent of the primary vote,
it is decided. In this race that will surely happen,
which makes its summer-cloaked obscurity unfortunate,
considering we will decide who fills one of the state’s
highest and most consequential offices.
Gonzalez was appointed to the Supreme Court by Gov.
Chris Gregoire in January, replacing the retiring
Justice Gerry Alexander. He came to the court after
serving 10 years as a judge of the King County Superior
Court. Prior to that, Gonzalez was an assistant United
States attorney and part of the team that prosecuted
Ahmed Ressam, the so-called Millenial Bomber who plotted
to attack Los Angeles International Airport. He has
served as a national instructor on terrorism
prosecution. He is a California native, graduate of the
University of California and Berkeley School of Law,
studied in Japan and China, and speaks Japanese, Chinese
and Spanish.
Gonzalez came for an interview in April, answering a
wide range of questions with patience, intelligence and
obvious dedication to the law. In the last question, he
was asked how it felt to have reporters ask him about
being the “first Latino on the state Supreme Court.” He
was proud of his heritage, he said, but was thinking how
refreshing it was to have an interview with no question
about ethnicity. “I take this job seriously,” he said.
We have had no contact with his opponent Danielson, who
has raised and spent no money on his campaign. He has
run unsuccessfully for local office three times, but has
no judicial experience or bar endorsements and lists
little that could be considered a qualification.
Gonzalez is rated exceptionally qualified by state and
local bar associations, is endorsed by every fellow
Supreme Court justice, the Association of Washington
Business, state Labor Council, gubernatorial candidates
Rob McKenna and Jay Inslee and many others of varied
background.
There is no printed voter’s guide for the primary
election. More information on the candidates can be
found on the secretary of state’s website, at
http://wei.sos.wa.gov/agency/osos/en/Pages/OnlineVotersGuide.aspx.
We recommend that you study the material, weigh their
qualifications and choose
Steven Gonzalez for state Supreme Court.
This is the opinion of The Wenatchee World and its
Editorial Board: Publisher Rufus Woods, Editor Cal
FitzSimmons and Editorial Page Editor Tracy Warner.
Primary decides for Supreme Court
August 3, 2012 — Voters make few choices more
consequential than naming a justice to the Washington
Supreme Court. The court oversees a third of state
government and decides whether the remaining two-thirds
work within the boundaries of law.
As important as it is, the choice is too often seen as a
secondary, to be casually made or ignored. In this
primary week, with ballots due Tuesday, that would be a
mistake. There are three Supreme Court seats on the
primary ballot. Two are held by incumbents — Justices
Steven Gonzalez and
Susan Owens — facing
inactive or unqualified challengers. Should either
receive a majority in the primary, the election will be
decided. We have already recommended Gonzalez be
retained.
The third seat is Position 9, being vacated by retiring
Justice Tom Chambers. It has drawn four energetic and
impressive candidates. Each has a distinct point of view
and qualities to recommend them. Unless one receives a
majority of Tuesday’s vote, two will move on to the
general election. Following reader requests for more
information on the race, we spoke with the candidates
this week. Voters can find more information at
votingforjudges.org, a video voter’s guide at
TVW.org, and a
side-by-side candidates’ forum at
tvw.org/index.php?option=com_tvwplayer&eventID=2012070010
Bruce Hilyer has served 12 years as a King County
Superior Court judge, after working in private practice
and as a deputy prosecutor. He combines the wide
experience of a trial court judge with an air of
competence and pragmatism. He urges justices to consider
not only the law but the consequences of their
decisions. Rulings too wide can bring unforeseen burdens
on society and its government, he said. Hilyer comes
widely recommended by the judiciary and legal community
in King County, and in Chelan County as well.
John Ladenburg, a Leavenworth native, is best known for
his long service as Pierce County prosecutor, Pierce
County executive and chairman of Sound Transit. He says
his deep experience in civil and criminal justice and
the machinery of government give him insight no
candidate has. He too says justices must know how their
decisions affect others. His statements have a political
edge to them, evidence of a career as an elected
official. He notes that he has wide support from
prosecuting attorneys and defense attorneys, across the
state and political spectrum.
Sheryl Gordon McCloud is a successful Seattle appellate
attorney who has argued hundreds of cases before the
Washington Supreme Court, and federal appeals courts.
Her entire career has been dedicated to protecting
constitutional rights, she said, and that will not
change. She said she has keen insight into the
intricacies of legal thought from her years of analysis
and argument that would serve her well as a justice. Her
skill and principle is impressive in conversation.
Political ideology is irrelevant, she says. She insists
she will protect the rights of the citizenry, come what
may.
Richard Sanders was 15 years a Supreme Court justice
before narrowly losing a re-election bid in 2010. He is
known as an inflexible advocate for the rights of the
individual, and he has lost none of the passion that
made him conspicuous during his judicial career. His
says his role, and the role of government, is to protect
the rights of citizens. He will not waiver or compromise
or worry about whom his opinions upset. The temperament
that made him controversial is still there. His points
of view are often admirable, but he can sound resentful,
impatient, even angry.
The choice is difficult, but the preponderance of
evidence leads us to favor
Hilyer. His practical experience on the bench, his
demeanor, standout ratings among colleagues, his
sensitivity to the real-world effects of judicial
decisions, all indicate he will be an effective justice
of the Supreme Court.
This is the opinion of The Wenatchee World and its
Editorial Board: Publisher Rufus Woods, Editor Cal
FitzSimmons and Editorial Page Editor Tracy Warner.