WA State Supreme Court Candidates face
off in debate.
By Larry Killion, Citizen Journalist
The Freedom Foundation’s “Theodore
L Stiles Center
for Liberty” presented a Forum for
the Candidates running for the Washington State Supreme Court at 7PM, July
10th 2012. A
co-sponsor for the event was Washington Coalition for Open Government in
cooperation with TVW and Tacoma News Tribune.
The setting was the beautiful grounds of Lakewold
Gardens at 12317 Gravely Lake Drive
in Lakewood.
Michael J. Reitz introduced the four candidates and gave
them a few minutes for an opening statement and words of introduction.
Richard Sanders
began by stating his qualifications and experience as a former Supreme Court
Justice endorsed by the retiring Justice from this opening. Sanders heard over 600 cases from the
Washington Supreme Court Bench. He has
many conservative endorsements. He emphasized
the need for the court to defend the rights of the individual citizen rather
than putting the government powers in priority. He pointed out the partisan
positions of career politicians trying to break into the judicial branch of
government now.
Sheryl McCloud
spoke of her 25 years of experience arguing for constitutional rights and
promised to maintain a track record favoring the constitution. She defended the 2nd amendment and
spoke against the death penalty. She is
endorsed by King County
and Pierce County Bar Associations, Women’s Rights Groups and the NAACP. She stressed her skills at assessing
strengths and weaknesses.
John Ladenburg
called himself an outsider. He insisted
that the judicial system needs to be more open and he wanted to change it from
a “good old boys” club to something more transparent. He is endorsed by the Tacoma News Tribune. He
spoke of his 12 years of experience as a defense lawyer and 14 years of
experience as a prosecuting attorney. He felt that he has the broadest range of
experience of all the candidates having served as a criminal defense lawyer, Pierce
County prosecutor, Tacoma City
Councilman, and Pierce County Executive.
Bruce Hilyer told
of his 12 years of experience on the King County Superior Court as a judge with
the support from 145 other judges on the bench.
He claimed the highest ratings as a non-partisan candidate endorsed by labor
unions, teachers and police. He insisted
that he had no ax to grind and that he desired to see the judicial branch of
our government become more modern and efficient in it’s administrative
activities.
Here are some of the questions asked of the candidates and
their answers.
What case has the
court ruled on that you would have ruled differently?
Sanders- The people voted down the Mariners Tax but the
court passed it anyway. I would not have
done that.
McCloud- The court ruled against public access to
trials. I would not have.
Ladenburg- The court’s ruling on the Anderson Case caused
hundreds of cases to be retried. I would
not have done that.
Hilyer- said he agreed with what Ladenburg said about the
Anderson Case.
How would you make
decisions on cases being heard?
McCloud- I would use the constitution for guidance.
Ladenburg- I would take into consideration the possible
unintended consequences of it.
Hilyer- I would pay attention to the specific details and
not decide with a broad brush.
Sanders- I agree with McCloud that the rule of law is the
important thing.
Name the US Supreme Court Justice that you admire the
most.
Ladenburg- Kennedy.
Hilyer- I go way back to John Marshall.
Sander- George Southerland in the 30’s.
McCloud- I’m surprised John chose Kennedy but he is my
choice too because he is a constitutionalist.
Discuss campaign
contributions and the legislator ability to use them.
Hilyer- We shouldn’t turn Washington
into something like Texas where
big money runs everything.
Sanders-The State constitution gives this right and we
should go by it or change the law.
McCloud- This is an evolving issue. The US Supreme court has not overturned it or
justified it. It is a 1st
amendment issue.
Ladenburg- We must be careful about Barons buying up
everything in politics.
31A gives more access
to court records. Do your favor or not?
Sanders- We can lawfully seal records but it should be the
exception not the rule.
McCloud- There must be a balance between an open court and
the right to privacy.
Ladenburg- We need more openness.
Hilyer- 31A is OK as it is.
Discuss the
Initiative and Referendum rights of the people.
McCloud- The Constitution gives this right. I’m for it.
Ladenburg- The court should give their advice before the
process can start.
Hilyer- No opinion, but agree somewhat with Ladenburg.
Sanders- Courts are to decide issues on individual rights
and defend them. There should be no
wasting time giving advice on issues that may not make it to the ballot.
Should cameras be in
the courtroom?
Ladenburg- Yes.
Hilyer- Yes.
Sanders- Yes.
McCloud- Yes.
What do you want to
accomplish by your term on the bench?
Hilyer- Bring the system up to date with computerized
paperless technology and replace the 30 year old paper system.
Sanders- Be impartial and defend the constitutional rights
of the individual against government abuse.
McCloud- I want people to be proud of their court decisions
whether they agree or disagree with them.
Ladenburg- Open up the court and bring it back to the
people.
What is the most
important judicial issue today?
Sanders- The court must be unbiased and impartial. Case law should not trump the constitution.
McCloud- The court must be independent and decide on the
rule of law not popular opinion.
Ladenburg- The court needs to get more organized.
Hilyer- Judicial independence, separation of powers and
individual rights should not trump the “common good.”
No comments:
Post a Comment