(The Center Square) – As a crowded August primary looms, Washington Supreme Court candidates are making their pitch to voters ahead of the 2026 election that could decide the fate of a new income tax.
The 9.9% tax on annual household income over $1 million is facing a constitutional challenge that will likely reach the high court in the next year or so, as 16 candidates face off for five seats on the bench.
The Office of the Secretary of State confirmed in an email to The Center Square on Tuesday that voter guides will be published by June 18 with candidate profiles written by each campaign. TVW, the state’s public affairs network, published a video guide on June 1 for 11 of the 14 people on the August ballot.
The two candidates with the most votes in each race in the August primary will advance to the general election.
Ian Birk and Sean O’Donnell, two judges competing to replace outgoing Justice Charles Johnson, have already advanced to the November general election, since they were the only ones to file for Position 4.
The other four positions will see a contested election this summer, with three candidates campaigning for Position 1, three for Position 3, four for Position 5 and four for Position 7.
Two incumbents, Justices Colleen Melody and Theo Angelis, joined the court this year after being appointed by Gov. Bob Ferguson.
“I’ve only ever worked as a government lawyer with the goal of protecting the civil and constitutional rights of my neighbors,” Melody told voters in her TVW voter’s guide statement, “and for many years I was the head of the Civil Rights Division in the Attorney General’s office here in Washington State.”
Both appointments replaced justices who retired before the end of their term, forcing the newcomers to compete on the ballot, but the timing raises questions, given that Ferguson signed the income tax.
While seasoned attorneys, neither Melody nor Angelis had served as a judge before joining the bench.
Melody worked under Ferguson while he was the state attorney general and received his endorsement, along with those of current Attorney General Nick Brown, every sitting justice and Solicitor General Noah Purcell.
Purcell had helped craft the income tax in anticipation of a legal challenge expected to reach the Supreme Court.
“You don’t have to wonder or worry about my decisions and legal analysis being influenced,” Laura Christensen Colberg, an attorney challenging Melody, said in her TVW video. “I won’t need to consider recusing myself on legislation that might be challenged because I was an employee of the governor.”
Records obtained by The Center Square show that Purcell advised state Democrats on how to use the tax to force the court to reconsider a 1933 ruling that essentially outlawed progressive income taxes.
Melody has not responded to numerous email inquiries from The Center Square in the past few months about whether she plans to recuse herself in a potential ruling over the income tax.
However, she did not recuse herself when rejecting a lawsuit earlier this year that would’ve allowed a voter referendum on the income tax.
“Our highest court must be a place where the law is applied fairly and thoughtfully, as written and in accordance with the Constitution, without political posturing,” Scott Edwards, a tax attorney seeking Melody’s seat, said in his video. “The court must serve as a fair and balanced check to government.”
Meanwhile, Angelis joined the bench after leaving K&L Gates, the law firm where he had worked with Ferguson about 20 years ago. Sen. Jamie Pedersen, the Democrat who proposed the income tax, also had worked there at the same time as Angelis and Ferguson, though Angelis outlasted both of them.
“I’ve taken on powerful interests and difficult cases, because I believe justice should work for all people,” Angelis said in his TVW video, citing wins against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Angelis is endorsed by Ferguson, every sitting justice and Democrat lawmakers, including Pedersen.
Moderate-to-conservative challengers have lined up in every Supreme Court race this year to provide some diversity of thought and swing the liberal bench to the right.
So far, the races, which are usually low-turnout affairs, have seen nearly $1.5 million in combined contributions from all of the candidates.
“Washington families, workers, and businesses deserve courts they can rely on. They deserve a justice who respects the Constitution, protects judicial independence, and applies the law fairly without political pressure,” Sharonda Amamilo, a Thurston County judge challenging Angelis, said in her TVW video.
Supreme Court elections are considered nonpartisan, and the state’s Code of Judicial Conduct prohibits candidates from making statements about cases and issues that are likely to come before the justices.
The judicial rule makes it difficult for voters without much knowledge of the court to make their picks.
In the TVW voters’ guide, the incumbents, including Chief Justice Debra Stephens, framed themselves as defending the court’s integrity, while challengers argued it’s already too politicized and misaligned.
“The political storm we face in our courts is caused by the desire of some to use the power and control of the courts to rule us instead of embracing the duty and responsibility to represent us. I can be the calm in that storm,” Dave Larson, a former Federal Way judge challenging Angelis, said in his TVW video.