Vote Mungia, not Larson, For Supreme Court
A Guest Post from Austin Field, Public Defender
Keep Larson's MAGA-Backed Hands Off Our Constitution
Editor’s Note: My guest post today is from Austin Field, a King County Public Defender. He has asked me to make it clear that the opinions expressed here are his own, and don’t represent his employer or anyone else.
I’m concerned about this Supreme Court race, because folks haven’t settled on a candidate, which means real risk of a MAGA-aligned and endorsed Justice. Larson’s understanding of legal interpretation is childish and he opposes the wildly popular tax on extreme capital gains. Vote Mungia!
-
Washington’s Supreme Court favors the rich. Electing Larson will make it worse.
For 91 years, Washington’s highest court has protected the rich through erroneous legal doctrines and deferential rulings, twisting Washington’s populist Constitution against the public it was meant to protect. As future 43rd District Representative Shaun Scott recently wrote, the Legislature has hidden behind the Court’s erroneous rulings to avoid permanently solving Washington’s ongoing school closure crisis—and a host of other policy problems—by taxing the rich.
Now, Washingtonians must choose between two future Supreme Court justices: Dave Larson, backed by those who benefit most from economic injustice, and Sal Mungia, a moderate backed by, well, everybody else. Voters should pick Mr. Mungia, but that won’t fix the damage done by decades of unlawful judicial power grabs. Washington will need bolder justices committed to truly enforcing our populist, egalitarian Constitution
Washington’s Constitution sharply limits corporate power
Whoever we elect must impartially uphold the Constitution, but Washington’s Constitution isn’t, itself, impartial—it’s strongly biased against entrenched wealth and powerful corporations. Washington’s founders, as racist and patriarchal as they were, had a few good ideas. According to Washington State University professor Cornell Clayton, Washington’s founders opposed “the tyranny of corporate power and special interests.” Washington’s Constitution prohibits monopolies, mandates workplace safety regulations, and grants the Legislature broad authority to regulate and even dissolve corporations. The Constitution goes even further, requiring the Legislature to prevent oligarchy by redistributing wealth to fund high-quality public education.
Washington’s founders knew that tax policy was a critical weapon in the fight against oligarchy. They wanted to prevent preferential tax exemptions for railroads and other powerful corporations, so they included a constitutional provision requiring all property to be taxed uniformly—at the same rate. But property wasn’t uniform; farmers paid a far higher percentage of their wealth in property taxes than their bankers did.
Washington voters, tired of bankers getting richer while farmers got poorer, amended the uniformity provision in 1930. The amendment allowed the Legislature to make the tax code fairer by creating different classes (types) of property and taxing each class at different rates. The Attorney General assured the Legislature that this amendment permitted a progressive income tax, which Washington’s voters overwhelmingly approved in 1932.
Washington’s Supreme Court undermines our populist Constitution
Unfortunately, Washington’s Supreme Court—egged on by powerful corporate lawyers—unconstitutionally seized control of tax policy. In a 5-4 decision, Culliton v. Chase, the court struck down the tax.
The problem with the Court’s Culliton decision isn’t that it prevented an income tax; reasonable people can disagree about whether income taxes are good policy. The problem with Culliton is that the Court, at the behest of corporate lawyers, transformed Washington’s populist Constitution into a shield for the powerful. By unlawfully undermining the Legislature’s broad authority to redistribute wealth, the Court ensured that every future attempt to fix Washington’s unjust tax system would face years of grinding litigation. The Court’s decision also created a convenient excuse for legislators to avoid fighting the rich and powerful.
Unfortunately, the Court continues to twist Washington’s progressive legal rules to benefit the wealthy. While the Court recently upheld Washington’s capital gains tax, the justices refused to fix the mess their predecessors created in Culliton.
Even more troublingly, the Court has sometimes bent over backwards to favor wealthy interests. Last year, the Court, in a 5-4 decision, allowed Alaska Airlines to discipline a flight attendant who used vacation time to care for an unexpectedly sick child—gutting protections in the Washington Family Care Act.
More insidiously, justices have also twisted correct, populist decisions into legal roadmaps for future corporate victories. In August, the Court ruled in favor of consumers accusing Amazon of price gouging, but three justices signed a disturbing concurrence written by substitute justice, former corporate lawyer, and current King County judge David Keenan. In his separate opinion, Keenan—a likely future candidate for the Supreme Court—presented himself as agreeing with the majority but strongly hinted that Amazon should defend itself by arguing that its price gouging was simply a “reasonable business practice.” He also uncritically cited a former Reagan Administration official to argue that even “unfair” prices may be legal under current price gouging laws.
Washington voters should reject pro-oligarchy judges
This November, Washingtonians will choose between two future justices: David Larson and Sal Mungia. A vote for David Larson is a vote for school closures; his campaign is backed by the same wealthy interests protecting the unjust tax system that created Washington’s education funding crisis.
His major donors include Steve Gordon, an extremely online multimillionaire—he uses ‘soyboy’ unironically—who has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to repeal taxes on the wealthy. Gordon also teamed up with oligarch Brian Heywood to create Project 42, a “clearinghouse” designed to funnel dark money to extremist, Koch-funded organizations like the Washington Policy Center. Mr. Larson’s campaign manager, Paige Jaramillo, works for another Project 42-backed group, the Citizen Action Defense Fund. Mr. Mungia, in contrast, is backed by tribes, unions, and other organizations fighting for Washington’s egalitarian, populist Constitution. Voters should pick Mr. Mungia.
But electing Mr. Mungia won’t be nearly enough, especially since his position on taxation remains a mystery. Washington’s current justices, almost all of whom back Mr. Mungia, are still too cozy with wealthy interests. They still refuse to relinquish their ill-gotten control over Washington’s tax policy. Washington voters must demand that future justices clearly and unequivocally acknowledge the Legislature’s power—and duty—to tax the wealthy.