Arguably, Christine Schaller may be among the most qualified to seek office as a Thurston County Superior Court judge. But she’s currently a resident of Pierce County. Despite her long time connections and work in Thurston, she lives in Pierce apparently in violation of RCW 3.50.057 and its language prohibiting non-residents from holding office as a county Superior Court judge.
Schaller’s Campaign bio & video
With respect to qualifications, her case is genuinely compelling. This reporter has witnessed her profoundly competent and hard work–the kind of judge, in that respect, all citizens wish for. But her legal case raised troubling issues. Do citizens want to abandon a law which requires judges to be part of the communities in which they adjudicate? Should Schaller prevail, will it open a Pandora’s box to interlopers from every corner of the State running for judicial office wherever opportunity arises? Will it confuse voters who are already ill informed as to candidates running to sit on the bench of the very courts we rely on to maintain stability, justice, and remedies in a contentious society?
Those questions may be answered on the 18th of this month (October, 2012) when Marie Clarke v. Kim Wyman (case #:87823-4) is argued before our State Supreme Court @ 1:30pm. This reporter will be there to record the event, arguments, and colloquy. A live stream (and video archive) will be made available by www.tvw.org for those who cannot attend but wish to see the unedited presentation by the parties. This case will be profoundly important to our system of elected judges in this State. For unlike Thurston Commissioner Indu Thomas who is also running to sit on the Thurston County Superior Court bench, Schaller is genuinely and truly well qualified. Unfortunately, Thomas is a Thurston County resident.
Additional ramifications extend to other judges currently sitting on the various Superior Court benches around the state (e.g. Grays Harbor County Judge Godfrey) whose legal residencies have been investigated and challenged. (More about the Judge Godfrey controversy can be found on this site.)
Shawn Newman, a highly articulate and dedicated Washington State attorney who teaches law at St. Martin’s College in Lacey, is representing Christine Schaller’s interest in this particular controversy. That interest prevailed when it was adjudicated by Kitsap Co. Superior Court Judge Olsen in Schaller’s favor. Newman argued our State’s Constitution was devoid of language requiring residence, therefore it superseded RCW 3.50.057 which does. He also raised a 1976 case (Hatfield v. Greco) which ruled once a Superior Court judge had adjudicated a ballot dispute, it couldn’t be appealed–the reasoning being citizens were entitled to a speedy and certain conclusion.
The outcome of this dispute could have huge implications for the future of our system of selecting judges, possibly becoming the progenitor of a transition to appointed judges, much as in the federal system.
